FREE SPEECH

I.  The Intent of the Framers
    A. the framers had 2 main worries...
        1. they feared official (govt.) censorship of the people
        2. they feared that the people would use freedom of speech to incite violence, riot, and revolution
    B. the 1st Amendment, therefore, only applies to the government
        1. it only prevents the govt. from restricting our speech
        2. private businesses are not prevented from doing so

II. Schenck v. US (1919)
    A. Charles Schenck handed out pamphlets urging young men to dodge the draft during World War I.
    B. Schenck was arrested for violating the Espionage Act of 1917
    C. His lawyers challenged his arrest, claiming that his 1st Amendment rights to free speech were violated.
    D. The Supreme Court upheld his arrest and conviction, stating the following.....
        1. speech is not free if it creates a "clear and present danger" of either harm or illegal activity. (translated: if your speech
            creates a good chance that someone will be harmed or will break the law, your speech IS NOT protected)
        2. in order to be prosecuted, your speech must incite "immediate lawless action"

III.  Yates v. US (1957)
    A. the govt. cannot punish someone for advocating illegal action as "abstract doctrine" that doesn't advocate a specific
         action. (translated: if what you say is abstract and vague, it will probably be protected)
    B. Example of this ruling in action:
        1. 1973: A group protesting the Vietnam War blocked the street during their protest. When a police officer ushered them
            to the sidewalk, one protester said, "We'll take the street later."
       2. The protester was arrested for disorderly conduct.
        3. Should his speech have been protected?
            a. Yes, it should have been protected.  2 reasons why...
                1. He advocated action that was abstract & vague (the Yates ruling).  "We'll take the street later" could have
                    meant many different things. In other words, he did not advocate a specific action.
                2. He advocated an action that would take place in the "indefinite future." It was not a call for "immediate lawless
                    action."

IV. Fighting Words
    A. Fightng words are:  words that would cause the average person to retaliate, thereby breaking the peace.
    B. Fighting words are not protected by the 1st Amendment
    C. Trouble with this statement: what is the standard for deciding who is average?  This standard is very subjective.

Back to C/E Daily Assignment Page