Essay On Overbreadth Amendment

Overbreadth Doctrine and the First Amendment
There are many individuals and groups alike that choose to express their disdain for certain actions, laws, and behaviors through the use of Freedom of Speech. The First Amendment has been cited by many protesters when demonstrating that it is their right to Freedom of expression. Freedom of Expression is powerful enough that sometimes words do not have to be spoken for a message to be conveyed. However, not all acts are protected by the First Amendment. For example, burning the flag is protected under the First Amendment but promoting the benefits of marijuana at a school event would be protected (U.S. Courts, n.d). If by chance there is a question of constitutionality regarding the First Amendment, it is usually linked to the overbreadth doctrine. Simply meaning, an individual may feel that their rights and/or others rights to Freedom of Speech may be prohibited by laws when applied under the context in which they were written. Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601 (1973) is the most quoted case that addresses issues of the overbreadth doctrine as it pertains to the First Amendment.
State v. Lilburn
In March of 1990, three (3) hunters assembled with permission from the
Taxpayers for Vincent (Brody & Acker, 2010, p. 40). Lilburn challenged that the legislature use of the word dissuades made the statue more or less content based regulation. However, the Court made it very clear that the harassment laws and other legislative history were not created to silence the views of the demonstrators that disagree with bison hunting. Therefore, it was found that there was no overbreadth that existed and if any were to be found, and then it is to be resolved on a case-by-case