Eleanor Finch
Civil disobedience is not protected by the Constitution, despite the First Amendment's protection of the right to dissent in many forms. By definition, civil disobedience involves the refusal to obey laws or regulations by violating them. This can conflict with the free speech rights enjoyed by others, and may disrupt or interfere with university business and academic efforts, or even threaten public safety or university assets. However, there is a case to be made for the protection of civil disobedience under the freedom of assembly clause, and the Supreme Court has already acknowledged a form of First Amendment penalty sensitivity.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Civil disobedience is constitutionally protected | No |
| Civil disobedience is protected speech | No |
| Civil disobedience is protected under the First Amendment | No |
| Civil disobedience is protected under the freedom of assembly clause | No, but this clause could be used to develop protection |
| Civil disobedience is protected under the Supreme Court's penalty sensitivity analysis | Yes, but only for peaceful protesters who should not face felony charges for trespass connected with a nonviolent assembly |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
- Civil disobedience is not protected speech under the Constitution
- The First Amendment protects the right to dissent in many forms, but not civil disobedience
- The freedom of assembly clause provides a natural constitutional vehicle for developing protection
- Courts have traditionally not provided civil disobedience First Amendment protection
- Supreme Court precedent acknowledges a form of First Amendment penalty sensitivity
Civil disobedience is not protected speech under the Constitution
The Constitution does not guarantee any right to engage in civil disobedience without incurring consequences. Civil disobedience may have a negative effect on the protected interests of others. For example, civil disobedience may interfere with University business, threaten public safety or University assets in ways that require the University to act to protect those interests. It is the duty of all Police Department personnel to defend the University community’s rights to pursue their normal activities.
The First Amendment protects the right to dissent in many forms, but not civil disobedience. Courts have traditionally not provided civil disobedience First Amendment protection. However, Supreme Court precedent already acknowledges a form of First Amendment penalty sensitivity, and it has been aware of the need to limit civil liability for organizers and others at protests.
The freedom of assembly clause in the Constitution provides a natural constitutional vehicle for developing this protection more fully, while at the same time, appropriately targeting its application.
Constitutional Rights: Mask Mandates and Personal Freedoms
You may want to see also
The First Amendment protects the right to dissent in many forms, but not civil disobedience
The Constitution does not guarantee any right to engage in civil disobedience without incurring consequences. Civil disobedience may have a negative effect on the protected interests of others. However, the freedom of assembly clause provides a natural constitutional vehicle for developing this protection more fully. While civil disobedience is not protected by the First Amendment, Supreme Court precedent acknowledges a form of First Amendment penalty sensitivity. This means that peaceful protesters should not face felony charges for trespass connected with a nonviolent assembly. It would also limit civil liability for those who organise nonviolent assemblies that involve civil disobedience when others then commit violence.
Russia's Constitution: Safeguarding Minorities' Rights?
You may want to see also
The freedom of assembly clause provides a natural constitutional vehicle for developing protection
Civil disobedience is not protected speech under the Constitution. By definition, civil disobedience involves the refusal to obey laws or regulations by violating them. However, the Constitution's freedom of assembly clause provides a natural constitutional vehicle for developing protection. While courts have traditionally not provided civil disobedience First Amendment protection, this approach marks a shift in First Amendment doctrine. Supreme Court precedent already acknowledges a form of First Amendment penalty sensitivity, and it has been aware of the need to limit civil liability for organisers and others at protests. This protection would not decriminalise previously unlawful actions, but it would introduce penalty sensitivity analysis and limit civil liability for those who organise nonviolent assemblies that involve civil disobedience when others then commit violence.
The Internet's Constitutional Rights: Exploring Protections and Limits
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Courts have traditionally not provided civil disobedience First Amendment protection
Civil disobedience is not protected speech under the Constitution. By definition, civil disobedience involves the refusal to obey laws or regulations by violating them. Actions and speech in civil disobedience may conflict with the free speech rights enjoyed by others, and may disrupt or interfere with university business and academic efforts, or even threaten public safety or university assets in ways that require the university or law enforcement to act to protect those other interests. Courts have traditionally not provided civil disobedience First Amendment protection.
However, there have been calls for the freedom of assembly clause to be used as a constitutional vehicle to develop protection for civil disobedience. While this approach would not decriminalize previously unlawful actions, it would introduce penalty sensitivity analysis and limit civil liability for those who organize nonviolent assemblies that involve civil disobedience when others then commit violence.
Fighting Words: Are They Protected Speech Under the Constitution?
You may want to see also
Supreme Court precedent acknowledges a form of First Amendment penalty sensitivity
Civil disobedience is not protected speech under the Constitution. By definition, civil disobedience involves the refusal to obey laws or regulations by violating them. This may conflict with the free speech rights enjoyed by others, and may disrupt or interfere with university business and academic efforts, or even threaten public safety or university assets.
The First Amendment protects the right to dissent in many forms, but not civil disobedience. However, the Constitution's neglected freedom of assembly clause provides a natural constitutional vehicle for developing this protection more fully.
Courts have traditionally not provided civil disobedience First Amendment protection. However, Supreme Court precedent already acknowledges a form of First Amendment penalty sensitivity. This would introduce penalty sensitivity analysis, for example, peaceful protesters should not face felony charges for trespass connected with a nonviolent assembly. It would also limit civil liability for those who organise nonviolent assemblies that involve civil disobedience when others then commit violence.
Florida's Constitution: Animal Protection Laws and Their Importance
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
No, civil disobedience is not protected speech under the Constitution.
Civil disobedience refers to the refusal to obey laws or regulations by violating them.
Civil disobedience may conflict with the free speech rights enjoyed by others, and may disrupt or interfere with university business and academic efforts, or even threaten public safety or university assets.
While civil disobedience is not protected by the First Amendment, there is a form of First Amendment penalty sensitivity that acknowledges the need to limit civil liability for organisers and others at protests.
