The Constitution's Safeguards: Public Protection Principles

The constitutional principle of checks and balances is considered to be the best protection for the public from abuse by one branch of government. The First Amendment also plays a key role in protecting the public, particularly in the context of public demonstrations and protests. While it protects the right to engage in hateful, racist, and offensive speech, it does not protect violent or unlawful activity.

Explore related products

An Introduction to Constitutional Law: 100+ Supreme Court Cases Everyone Should Know

$26 $34.95

Constitutional Law: [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$237.95 $359

The Constitution of the United States of America: The Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights

$9.99 $9.99

Constitutional Law For Dummies

$18 $29.99

Constitutional Law: Principles and Polices (Aspen Treatise)

$97.38 $126.95

The Constitution of the United States and The Declaration of Independence

$1.99 $6.95

Checks and balances

When protests occur on private property, the property owners are free to restrict unwanted speech, ban weapons, require event organisers to pay the full costs of providing security, and otherwise limit potentially harmful conduct. In addition, the First Amendment discussion focuses exclusively on so-called public forums, where most expressive gatherings occur, rather than on nonpublic forums, where speech rights are highly constrained.

Courts have found speech restrictions to be content-based when the possibility (or actuality) of a hostile audience caused governmental officials to deny permit requests, cancel scheduled events, change the location of proposed events, search all attendees, employ crowd-control measures, and silence individual speakers engaged in expression. Facially neutral permitting regulations will be deemed content-based when they invite officials to consider how others might react to a particular speaker’s message. This is true, for example, of permitting fees designed to offset the costs of police protection.

First Amendment rights

The First Amendment protects the right to engage in hateful, racist, offensive speech and to associate with others who share those views. However, it is important to note that the First Amendment does not protect violent or unlawful activity. This includes restrictions on gun possession and paramilitary activity.

The First Amendment also regulates governmental actors, not private individuals. Therefore, when protests occur on private property, the property owners are free to restrict unwanted speech, ban weapons, and require event organizers to pay the full costs of providing security.

In the context of public demonstrations, the First Amendment places crucial limitations on speech restrictions. Courts have found speech restrictions to be content-based when the possibility of a hostile audience causes governmental officials to deny permit requests, cancel scheduled events, or change the location of proposed events.

Additionally, the First Amendment protects the right to free speech in so-called "public forums", where most expressive gatherings occur. However, speech rights are highly constrained in "nonpublic forums".

Limitations on speech and assembly

While the First Amendment protects the right to engage in hateful, racist, offensive speech, it does not protect violent or unlawful activity. The First Amendment also does not apply to private property, where property owners are free to restrict unwanted speech. In the context of public demonstrations, courts have found speech restrictions to be content-based when the possibility of a hostile audience causes government officials to deny permit requests, cancel scheduled events, change the location of proposed events, search all attendees, employ crowd-control measures, and silence individual speakers.

Checks and balances are another constitutional principle that protects the public from abuse by one branch of government. This ensures that no single branch of government becomes too powerful and can prevent the abuse of power.

The Second Amendment also places limitations on speech and assembly, particularly regarding gun possession and paramilitary activity. These limitations are in place to ensure public safety and prevent violence.

While the First Amendment protects free speech, there are certain limitations in place to maintain order and protect the public. These limitations include restrictions on violent or unlawful activity, as well as the ability for private property owners to restrict unwanted speech. Additionally, content-based speech restrictions may be implemented by government officials to maintain public order and safety.

Explore related products

Constitutional Law (University Casebook Series)

$269.76 $305

A Short & Happy Guide to Constitutional Law

$28 $28

Examples & Explanations for Constitutional Law: National Power and Federalism (Examples & Explanations Series)

$59.81 $76.95

Constitutional Law: a QuickStudy Laminated Reference Guide

$8.32 $8.95

Examples & Explanations for Constitutional Law: Individual Rights (Examples & Explanations Series)

$76.95 $76.95

Constitutional Law [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$75.91 $345

The right to protest

The First Amendment is the constitutional principle that best protects the public's right to protest. The First Amendment protects the right to engage in hateful, racist, offensive speech and to associate with others who share those views. However, it does not protect violent or unlawful activity.

The First Amendment is a crucial limitation in the context of public demonstrations. Courts have found speech restrictions to be content-based when the possibility (or actuality) of a hostile audience caused governmental officials to deny permit requests, cancel scheduled events, change the location of proposed events, search all attendees, employ crowd-control measures, and silence individual speakers engaged in expression.

The First Amendment also applies to limitations on speech and assembly, including restrictions on gun possession and paramilitary activity, in the interest of public safety. Violence and incitement to imminent unlawful or violent activity are not protected by the First Amendment.

When protests occur on private property, the First Amendment does not apply, and property owners are free to restrict unwanted speech, ban weapons, require event organizers to pay the full costs of providing security, and otherwise limit potentially harmful conduct.

Public safety

The First Amendment also does not protect violence or incitement to imminent unlawful or violent activity. Courts have found speech restrictions to be content-based when the possibility of a hostile audience causes government officials to deny permit requests, cancel scheduled events, or change the location of events. In addition, facially neutral permitting regulations will be deemed content-based when they invite officials to consider how others might react to a particular speaker's message.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has held that decisions to search attendees at a public demonstration cannot be based on officials' unguided judgment. Such mass searches may only be undertaken pursuant to "objective, established standards" that predated the decision to implement safety protocols for a particular gathering.

Courts have recognised that governments have a compelling interest in ensuring public safety and order at public events. However, problems can arise when governments cannot demonstrate that their asserted interests are seriously implicated under the particular circumstances at issue. In these cases, it may be difficult to establish that speech has not been excessively restricted in relation to valid governmental goals.

Frequently asked questions