The Importance Of The First Amendment
Does the First Amendment mean anyone can say anything at any time? No.
The Supreme Court has rejected an interpretation of speech without limits.
Because the First Amendment has such strong language, we begin with the presumption that speech is protected. Over the years, the courts have decided that a few other public interests — for example, national security, justice or personal safety — override freedom of speech. There are no simple rules for determining when speech should be limited, but there are some general tests that help.
Clear and Present Danger
Will this act of speech create a dangerous situation? The First Amendment does not protect statements that are uttered to provoke violence or incite illegal action.
Justice Holmes, speaking for the unanimous Supreme Court, stated, “The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that …show more content…
Would the average person, applying the contemporary community standards, viewing the work as a whole, find the work appeals to the prurient interest? 2. Does the work depict or describe sexual conduct in a patently offensive way? 3. Does the work taken as a whole lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value?
One must distinguish “obscene” material, speech not protected by the First Amendment, from “indecent” material, speech protected for adults but not for children. The Supreme Court also ruled that “higher standards” may be established to protect minors from exposure to indecent material over the airwaves. In FCC v. Pacifica Foundation the court “recognized an interest in protecting minors from exposure to vulgar and offensive spoken language.”
Conflict with Other Legitimate Social or Governmental Interests
Does the speech conflict with other compelling interests? For example, in times of war, there may be reasons to restrict First Amendment rights because of conflicts with national
The Supreme Court has rejected an interpretation of speech without limits.
Because the First Amendment has such strong language, we begin with the presumption that speech is protected. Over the years, the courts have decided that a few other public interests — for example, national security, justice or personal safety — override freedom of speech. There are no simple rules for determining when speech should be limited, but there are some general tests that help.
Clear and Present Danger
Will this act of speech create a dangerous situation? The First Amendment does not protect statements that are uttered to provoke violence or incite illegal action.
Justice Holmes, speaking for the unanimous Supreme Court, stated, “The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that …show more content…
Would the average person, applying the contemporary community standards, viewing the work as a whole, find the work appeals to the prurient interest? 2. Does the work depict or describe sexual conduct in a patently offensive way? 3. Does the work taken as a whole lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value?
One must distinguish “obscene” material, speech not protected by the First Amendment, from “indecent” material, speech protected for adults but not for children. The Supreme Court also ruled that “higher standards” may be established to protect minors from exposure to indecent material over the airwaves. In FCC v. Pacifica Foundation the court “recognized an interest in protecting minors from exposure to vulgar and offensive spoken language.”
Conflict with Other Legitimate Social or Governmental Interests
Does the speech conflict with other compelling interests? For example, in times of war, there may be reasons to restrict First Amendment rights because of conflicts with national