How have Congress and the courts justified placing limits on the freedom of speech?
http://www.freedomforum.org/packages/first/curricula/educationforfreedom/supportpages/l04-limitsfreedomspeech.htm
http://ever-increasing-entropy.blogspot.com/2009/12/legitimate-limitations-on-freedom-of.html
as always, just what i needed. thank you very much.
You're very welcome.
Congress and the courts have justified placing limits on the freedom of speech in certain situations in order to balance the right to free expression with other important societal interests. There are generally three types of speech that are not protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution: obscenity, defamation, and incitement to violence.
1. Obscenity: The Supreme Court has held that obscenity is not protected under the First Amendment. However, determining what qualifies as obscene can be subjective and requires a careful assessment of the content's prurient appeal, artistic or scientific value, and whether it violates contemporary community standards.
2. Defamation: Defamatory speech, which includes false statements of fact that harm someone's reputation, is not protected by the First Amendment. The courts have determined that individuals have a right to protect their reputations from false and damaging statements, and thus, restrictions can be placed on defamatory speech.
3. Incitement to violence: Speech that incites or directly leads to imminent lawless action, such as violence or harm to others, is not protected. The courts have drawn a distinction between advocating for violence in an abstract or hypothetical manner (which is protected) and inciting specific, immediate, and likely violence (which is not protected).
It is important to note that these limitations are subject to ongoing interpretation and refinement by the courts. Balancing the protection of free speech while considering the potential harm it may cause is a complex and ongoing legal and philosophical debate. By understanding the legal principles and precedents established by the courts, one can further explore the justifications for placing limits on the freedom of speech.