The Constitution's First Amendment: Free Speech Cornerstone

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects freedom of speech. It states that Congress shall make no law...abridging freedom of speech. The interpretation of this statement has been the subject of numerous Supreme Court cases, including those concerning the freedom to criticise a war, oppose abortion, or advocate for higher taxes. The First Amendment does not protect speech that incites people to break the law, including acts of violence. The Supreme Court has also ruled that political expenditures and contributions are speech within the meaning of the First Amendment, as they are intended to facilitate political expression.

Explore related products

Murder the Truth: Fear, the First Amendment, and a Secret Campaign to Protect the Powerful

$19.9 $32.99

Freedom for the Thought That We Hate: A Biography of the First Amendment

$10.99 $17.99

A Short & Happy Guide to the First Amendment (Short & Happy Guides)

$28 $28

The First Amendment: Essays on the Imperative of Intellectual Freedom

$23 $7.95

Make No Law: The Sullivan Case and the First Amendment

$14.59 $20

First Amendment (Examples & Explanations)

$50.09 $76.95

The First Amendment

The freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment extends beyond just words and includes symbolic expression, such as displaying or burning flags, wearing armbands, or burning crosses. This protection of symbolic expression has been upheld by the Supreme Court, which has ruled that restrictions on speech based on its content generally violate the First Amendment. However, there are exceptions, such as when speech constitutes a genuine threat, harassment, or defamation.

The interpretation and application of the First Amendment's protection of free speech have been the subject of numerous court cases and continue to evolve. The Supreme Court has struggled to define the boundaries of protected speech, and the lower courts have applied various tests to determine whether specific types of speech are protected. The First Amendment's protection of free speech is a fundamental right in the United States, and its interpretation has significant implications for individuals' rights and the democratic process.

Freedom of speech in schools

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, ratified on December 15, 1791, protects freedom of speech. It states that "Congress shall make no law...abridging freedom of speech."

Students do not lose their right to freedom of speech by being in a school setting. The First Amendment applies to public schools, and students are allowed to express their views, distribute flyers and petitions, and wear clothing that expresses their views. However, the school may restrict speech that disrupts the functioning of the school or violates content-neutral policies. The definition of "disruptive" varies by context, but it does not include a school disagreeing with a student's position or finding their speech controversial.

Students have the right to wear clothing that aligns with their gender identity and expression. Schools cannot create dress codes that enforce gender stereotypes or censor particular viewpoints.

Additionally, schools cannot discriminate against students based on race, colour, or national origin. They must also provide equal access to students with disabilities and those with limited English proficiency.

While students have the right to free speech, schools can punish them for certain types of speech or expression. For example, schools can forbid profane language and punish students for advocating illegal drug use. They can also censor student speech in school publications if it is likely to disrupt school operations.

The punishment for any infractions may vary depending on the state, school district, and specific school policies. Students have the right to a formal process and legal representation for suspensions of ten days or more, and this may also be the case for shorter suspensions in some states and districts.

Freedom of Speech on Social Media

Students have the right to freedom of speech on social media, and schools generally cannot punish them for content posted outside of school hours and off-campus, unless it relates to the school. However, courts have differed on the constitutionality of such punishments, and the ACLU has challenged schools' attempts to extend their authority in this area.

Freedom of the press

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law...abridging freedom of speech". The Amendment also encompasses freedom of the press, which has been interpreted as protecting the right of journalists to publish without interference from the state.

The First Amendment's protection of freedom of the press has been the subject of significant debate and litigation in the United States. One notable case is *Branzburg v. Hayes* (1972), in which a journalist claimed that being forced to appear and testify before a grand jury violated their freedom of the press. The Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment did not provide a journalist with the right to refuse a subpoena in this context.

The First Amendment's protection of freedom of the press also extends to the content of publications. The Supreme Court has held that restrictions on speech because of its content—that is, when the government targets the speaker's message—generally violate the First Amendment. For example, laws that prohibit people from criticising a war or opposing abortion are examples of unconstitutional content-based restrictions.

The First Amendment does not, however, provide absolute protection for freedom of the press. The Supreme Court has held that speech that incites people to break the law, including committing acts of violence, is not protected. For example, in *Brandenburg v. Ohio*, the Court ruled that the First Amendment does not permit a state to forbid advocacy of the use of force or violation of the law, unless such advocacy is likely to produce imminent lawless action.

The First Amendment's protection of freedom of the press also does not prevent the government from regulating the time, place, and manner of speech to ensure it does not disrupt ordinary activities. For example, public universities can restrict speech that is intended and likely to provoke imminent unlawful action or otherwise break the law.

Explore related products

Understanding the First Amendment (Understanding Series)

$51.73 $55

The Case Against Free Speech: The First Amendment, Fascism, and the Future of Dissent

$28 $14.95

The First Amendment (Concepts and Insights)

$45 $60

First Amendment For Beginners

$11.78 $15.95

The First Amendment (Aspen Casebook)

$85.99 $206

First Amendment: [Connected eBook] (Aspen Casebook Series)

$240.9 $308

True threats

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects freedom of speech. However, this does not mean that individuals may say whatever they wish, wherever they wish. The Supreme Court has ruled that threats of violence are outside the protection of the First Amendment. This is to protect individuals from the fear of violence, the disruption that fear engenders, and the possibility of the threatened violence occurring.

• The reaction of the recipient of the threat and of other listeners
• Whether the threat was conditional
• Whether the threat was communicated directly to its victim
• Whether the maker of the threat had made similar statements to the victim in the past
• Whether the victim had reason to believe that the maker of the threat had a propensity to carry it out

In addition to true threats, speech that incites people to break the law, including committing acts of violence, is also unprotected by the First Amendment. In Brandenburg v. Ohio, the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment does not protect speech that is likely to incite imminent lawless action. Similarly, universities may restrict speech that is intended to provoke imminent unlawful action or otherwise break the law.

Harassment

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution enshrines the right of the American people to speak freely in the public square without government interference. However, this right is not absolute, and there are certain limitations to free speech, including harassment.

In the context of a university setting, harassment may include following someone, repeatedly targeting them with your conduct, and refusing to leave them alone after requests to do so. It is important to note that isolated pure speech or expression is unlikely to constitute harassment on its own. Additionally, universities may restrict speech that constitutes a genuine threat or harassment, is intended to provoke imminent unlawful action, or otherwise violates the law.

In the workplace, harassment law might keep employees from discussing certain topics, such as women's rights or affirmative action. However, the argument is that the interest in equality justifies such a restriction. Harassment law is a viewpoint-based restriction, and the Court has most strongly condemned this type of restriction.

In conclusion, while the First Amendment protects an individual's right to free speech, there are limitations to this right, and harassment is one such limitation. To constitute harassment, the speech or conduct must meet certain criteria, including targeting, severity, and pervasiveness, as determined by case law and court interpretations.

Frequently asked questions