Simone Lawson
Freedom of speech is a fundamental human right that enables individuals and communities to express their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation or censorship. The concept of free speech is enshrined in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which states that Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech. This amendment protects speech, even when the ideas expressed are offensive, immoral, or unpopular. While the interpretation of free speech can vary across cultures and political systems, it is widely recognised as a cornerstone of democratic societies, allowing for the open exchange of information, ideas, and criticism. The protection of free speech also extends to symbolic expressions, such as flag burning or wearing armbands, and has been a pivotal tool in social movements, including the Civil Rights Movement in the United States.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Freedom of speech is a human right | Protects freedom of speech, religion, and the press |
| Protects the freedom to peacefully assemble or gather together or associate with a group of people for social, economic, political, or religious purposes | |
| Protects the right to protest the government | |
| Protects speech even when the ideas put forth are thought to be illogical, offensive, immoral, or hateful | |
| Protects the right to not salute the flag | |
| Protects the right of students to wear black armbands to school to protest a war | |
| Protects the right to use certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages | |
| Protects the right of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event | |
| Protects the right of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event | |
| Protects the right to display flags, burn flags, wear armbands, burn crosses, etc. | |
| Protects the right to speak openly of violent action and revolution in broad terms | |
| Protects the right to criticize a war, oppose abortion, or advocate high taxes | |
| Protects the right to contribute to political candidates |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Freedom of expression
Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. The right to freedom of expression has been recognised as a human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights law. Many countries have constitutional law that protects free speech.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, adopted in 1791, protects freedom of speech. The First Amendment states that: "Congress shall make no law...abridging freedom of speech." This means that the government may not jail, fine, or impose civil liability on people or organisations based on what they say or write, except in exceptional circumstances. The Supreme Court has held that speakers are protected against all government agencies and officials, including federal, state, and local governments.
The First Amendment protects speech even when the ideas put forth are thought to be illogical, offensive, immoral, or hateful. For example, in Cohen v. California (1943), the Court ruled that an individual could use certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages. In R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992), the Supreme Court ruled that hate speech is permissible, except in the case of imminent violence.
However, the First Amendment does not protect all speech. For instance, in Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser (1986), the Court held that students could not make obscene speeches at school-sponsored events. The First Amendment also does not protect speech that constitutes a genuine threat, harassment, or is intended to provoke imminent unlawful action.
The interpretation of the limitations of harm and offence to freedom of speech varies across different cultures and political systems. For example, in Russia, the harm and offence principles have been used to justify the Russian LGBT propaganda law restricting speech concerning LGBT issues. Many European countries outlaw speech that might be interpreted as Holocaust denial.
Originalism: Interpreting the Constitution as Written
You may want to see also
Freedom of religion
Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. The right to freedom of expression has been recognised as a human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights law.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, adopted in 1791, protects freedom of speech. It states:
> Congress shall make no law...abridging freedom of speech.
The First Amendment also contains two provisions concerning freedom of religion: the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause.
The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from establishing a religion. Historically, this meant prohibiting state-sponsored churches, such as the Church of England. Today, what constitutes an "establishment of religion" is often governed under the three-part test set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971).
The Free Exercise Clause prohibits the government from prohibiting the free exercise of religion. In other words, it protects the right of individuals to practice their religion of choice without government interference.
The First Amendment thus guarantees both freedom of speech and freedom of religion, ensuring that individuals in the United States have the right to express their opinions and beliefs without government censorship or restriction.
Trump's Threat to the Constitution
You may want to see also
Freedom of the press
Freedom of speech is a principle that protects the freedom of an individual or community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. The right to freedom of expression has been recognised as a human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights law. Many countries have constitutional law that protects free speech, including the United States.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, adopted in 1791, protects freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press". This means that the government may not jail, fine, or impose civil liability on people or organisations based on what they say or write, except in exceptional circumstances. The Supreme Court has interpreted this to mean that speakers are protected against all government agencies and officials, including federal, state, and local governments.
The freedom of the press is a key aspect of freedom of speech. One of the world's first freedom of the press acts was introduced in Sweden in 1766, largely due to the efforts of Anders Chydenius, a classical liberal member of parliament and Ostrobothnian priest. The Swedish Freedom of the Press Act has been an important milestone in the history of free speech and has influenced the development of similar laws in other countries.
In the context of the United States Constitution, freedom of the press means that the government cannot restrict the publication or dissemination of news, information, or opinions by the media. This includes both traditional media outlets such as newspapers and magazines, as well as online publications and social media platforms. The Supreme Court has held that restrictions on the content of speech, such as prohibiting criticism of a war or the government, generally violate the First Amendment.
While freedom of the press is a fundamental right, it is not absolute. There are certain limited circumstances in which the government can restrict the freedom of the press. For example, the government may prohibit the publication of classified information or impose reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on press activities to protect public safety or national security. Additionally, the Supreme Court has held that the government can constitutionally limit the amount that individuals or corporations contribute to political candidates or spend on political advertising to prevent undue influence on electoral outcomes.
Letterhead Phone Numbers: Local Address or Not?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Right to peaceably assemble
The right to peaceably assemble is a basic right enshrined in the US Constitution, specifically in the First Amendment. This right protects the ability of people to gather peacefully and address grievances against the government. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances".
The right to assemble has been a crucial protection for dissenting and unorthodox groups throughout American history. Groups such as Democratic-Republican Societies, suffragists, abolitionists, religious organizations, labor activists, and civil rights groups have invoked this right to protest against prevailing norms. The Supreme Court's unanimous decision in De Jonge v. Oregon in 1937 extended this right beyond the federal government to the states, recognising that "the right of peaceable assembly is a right cognate to those of free speech and free press and is equally fundamental".
The right to assemble is often associated with the right to petition the government, as stated in the First Amendment. However, some scholars argue that these are two distinct rights, with assembly being the subordinate right that enables the primary right to petition. The right to assemble presupposes the formation of a group or association, which involves building relationships, developing ideas, and forming social bonds—activities that are protected from unwarranted government interference.
While the right to peaceably assemble is guaranteed, there are limitations. The First Amendment does not protect violent or disruptive assemblies aimed at inciting violence and crime. Police and government officials may place certain narrow restrictions on assemblies to maintain order. For example, cities may limit the disruption caused by protests as a condition for allowing them to take place in public spaces. Additionally, private property owners can set their own rules for speech and assembly on their property.
The interpretation of "peaceably assemble" has been a subject of debate, particularly during recent protests, such as those following the killing of George Floyd. While the right to be disruptive is recognised, the lack of clear guidance from courts on the extent of constitutionally protected disruption has led to burdens on protesters' rights. This ambiguity highlights the ongoing evolution of free assembly rights in the United States.
Founders Who Shaped the Constitution
You may want to see also
Right to petition the government
The right to petition the government is a fundamental freedom, explicitly stated in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. This right prohibits Congress from infringing upon "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances".
The right to petition allows citizens to approach administrative agencies, courts, and all branches of the government to seek redress for their grievances. This right has been interpreted to include demands for the government to exercise its powers in the interest of the petitioners and to address their politically contentious matters. The right to petition is not limited to formal, court-like filings, but also includes grassroots advocacy and lobbying practices.
The history of the right to petition dates back to the Magna Carta in 1215, the English Bill of Rights of 1689, and the Petition of Right in 1628. In the United States, the right to petition played a significant role in the country's history, with the Declaration of Independence citing King George III's failure to address colonial petitions as a justification for independence. The right to petition was also crucial in advocating for the end of slavery and women's suffrage, with Congress receiving and considering petitions from a diverse range of individuals, including those from unenfranchised groups.
While the right to petition is protected, it does not guarantee that the government or policymakers are required to listen or respond to the petitions. The Supreme Court has interpreted the Petition Clause as being similar to the Free Speech Clause, but has acknowledged that there may be differences between the two. The right to petition does not provide absolute immunity, as seen in McDonald v. Smith, where the Court ruled that defamatory statements within a petition are still subject to libel and defamation laws.
In modern times, the practice of petitioning varies, with some governments having established systems for receiving and addressing petitions, while others may treat petitions as a form of free speech, with no obligation to respond.
The Preamble: A Clause or Not?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Freedom of speech is the right to articulate opinions and ideas without interference, retaliation or punishment from the government. The First Amendment to the US Constitution protects the freedom of speech, religion, and the press.
The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Freedom of speech includes spoken and written words as well as symbolic speech, such as displaying flags, wearing armbands, and the like.
The right to freedom of speech has been upheld in several landmark Supreme Court cases, including Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), which protected students' right to wear black armbands to school to protest a war, and NAACP v. Alabama (1958), which recognised the right of association and protected membership lists against state investigation.
