Freedom of Expression

Question 1

[FIB]

Sec. 4, Art. III. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of _____, of ______, or of the _____, or the right of the people peaceably to ______ and petition the government for __________________.

Answer 1

speech;
expression;
press;
assemble;
redress of grievances

Sec. 4, Art. III. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of _____, of ______, or of the _____, or the right of the people peaceably to ______ and petition the government for __________________.

Question 2

[FIB]

Sec. 18(1) Art. III. No person shall be detained solely by reason of his ________ and ______.

Answer 2

political beliefs;

aspirations

Sec. 18(1) Art. III. No person shall be detained solely by reason of his ________ and ______.

Question 3

What is the scope of the freedom of expression?

Answer 3

The scope of freedom of expression is so broad that it extends protection to nearly all forms of communication. It protects speech, print and assembly regarding secular as well as political causes, and is not confined to any particular field of human interest. The protection covers myriad matters of public interest or concern embracing all issues, about which information is needed or appropriate, so as to enable members of society to cope with the exigencies of their period

[Chavez v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 168338 (2008)].

Question 4

What is included in ‘expression and speech’?

Answer 4

1. Written or spoken words (recorded or not recorded)
2. Symbolic speech (e.g. wearing of armbands as a symbol of protest)
   However, in NUWHRAIN-APL-IUF Dusit Hotel Nikko Chapter v. CA [G.R. No. 163942 (2008)], it was held that the labor union members’ violation of the hotel’s grooming standards constitutes an illegal strike, which is not protected by the right to freedom of expression.
3. Films and television programs [Iglesia ni Cristo v. CA, G.R. No. 119673 (1996)]

Expression and speech include all forms of expression, whether written, spoken, or recorded. It also includes symbolic speech and speech in the form of films and the like. Any and all modes of protection are embraced in the guaranty. It is reinforced by Sec. 18(1), Art. III.

Question 5

Is the freedom of speech absolute?

Answer 5

NO.

While the right has a widespread scope, it is not absolute. Examples of unprotected speech are obscenity, child pornography, and libel.

Question 6

What is prior restraint?

Answer 6

Prior restraint refers to official governmental restrictions on the press or other forms of expression in advance of actual publication or dissemination. While any system of prior restraint comes to court bearing a heavy burden against its constitutionality, not all prior restraints on speech are invalid [Newsounds Broadcasting Network v. Dy, G.R. No. 170270 (2009)].

Every man shall have a right to speak, write, and print his opinions upon any subject whatsoever, without any prior restraint, so always that he does not injure any other person in his rights, person, property, or reputation, and so always that he does not thereby disturb the public peace or attempt to subvert the government [Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931)].

Question 7

What are examples of prior restraint?

Answer 7

• Censorship:

Censorship conditions the exercise of freedom of expression upon the prior approval of the government. The censor serves therefore as the political, moral, social and artistic arbiter for the people, usually applying only their own subjective standards in determining what is good and what is not.

• Permits
• business closure

Question 8

What are the general rules regarding prior restraint?

Answer 8

1. Any system of prior restraints of expression comes to the Court bearing a heavy presumption against its constitutionality, giving the government a heavy burden to show justification for the imposition of such restraint
   [New York Times Co. v. US, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)].
2. There need not be total suppression. Even restriction of circulation constitutes censorship [Grosjean v. American Press Co., Inc., 297 U.S. 233 (1936)].

Question 9

What are examples of Unconstitutional Prior Restraint?

Answer 9

• COMELEC prohibition against radio commentators and newspaper columnists from commenting on the issues involved in a scheduled plebiscite [Sanidad v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 90878 (1990)]
• Arbitrary closure of a radio station [Eastern Broadcasting v. Dans, Jr., G.R. No. L-59329 (1985)]; or even when there is legal justification, such as lack of mayor’s permit [Newsounds Broadcasting Network v. Dy, supra]
• COMELEC resolution prohibiting the posting of decals and stickers in mobile units such as cars and other vehicles [Adiong v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 103956 (1992)]
• Searching, padlocking, and sealing of the offices of newspaper publishers by military authorities [Burgos v. Chief of Staff, G.R. No. L-64261 (1984)]
• An announcement by a public official prohibiting the media from airing or broadcasting the Garci tapes [Chavez v. Gonzales, supra]

Question 10

What are examples of Constitutional Prior Restraint?

Answer 10

• Law which prohibits, except during the prescribed election period, making speeches, announcements, or commentaries for or against the election of any candidate for office [Gonzales v. COMELEC, G.R. No. L-27833 (1969)]
• Prohibiting any person making use of the media from selling or giving print space or air time free of charge for campaign or other political purposes. Ratio: Police power of the State to regulate media for the purpose of ensuring equal opportunity, time, and space for political campaigns, which COMELEC is authorized to carry out. [National Press Club v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 102653 (1992); Osmeña v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 132231 (1998)]
• Film censorship: The power of the MTRCB can be exercised only for purposes of reasonable classification, not censorship [NACHURA, citing Gonzalez v. Katigbak, G.R. No. L-69500 (1985) and Ayer Prod. PTY. LTD. v. Judge Capulong, G.R. No. 82380 (1988)]

Question 11

What is the rule of freedom from subsequent punishment re freedom of speech?

Answer 11

Freedom of speech includes freedom after speech. Without this assurance, citizens would hesitate to speak for fear that they might be provoking the vengeance of the officials they criticized (chilling effect).

Question 12

What are examples of valid subsequent punishment?

Answer 12

• Libel – Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it be true [Alonzo v. CA, G.R. No. 110088 (1995)]
• Obscenity – Determination of what is obscene is a judicial function [Pita v. CA, G.R. No. 80806 (1989)]
• Contempt for criticism or publications tending to impede, obstruct, embarrass, or influence the courts in administering justice in a pending suit or proceeding (subjudice) [People v. Alarcon, G.R. No. 46551 (1939)]
• Imputation of irregularities in the judiciary must strike a balance between the right to free press and the reputation of judges. A reporter is prohibited from recklessly disregarding a private reputation without any bona fide effort to ascertain the truth thereof. [In Re: Jurado, A.M. No. 93-2-037 SC (1995)]
• Right of students to free speech in school premises must not infringe on the school’s right to discipline its students [Miriam College Foundation v. CA, G.R. No. 127930 (2000)]

Question 13

What are the exceptions to the presumtion that ‘every defamatory imputiation is presumed to be malicious, even if true’?

Answer 13

Exceptions to the Presumption [Art. 354, Revised Penal Code]

o Private communication in the performance of any legal, moral, or social duty

o Fair and true report of any judicial, legislative, or other official proceedings

Question 14

What are the exceptions to valid subsequent punishment?

Answer 14

1. Fair comment on matters of public interest – Fair comment is that which is true or, if false, expresses the real opinion of the author based upon reasonable degree of care and on reasonable grounds
2. Criticism of official conduct is given the widest latitude [US v. Bustos, G.R. No. L-12592 (1918)]

Question 15

What are Unprotected Speech?

Answer 15

1. Obscenity
2. Child Pornography
3. Libel
4. Fighting Words

Slander or libel, lewd and obscene speech, as well as “fighting words” are not entitled to constitutional protection and may be penalized

[Chavez v. Gonzales, supra].

Question 16

What is the test devoloped to determine obscenity in Roth v US?

Answer 16

The standard
for judging obscenity, adequate to withstand the charge of constitutional infirmity, is whether, to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interest. [354 U.S. 476 (1957)]

Question 17

What is the test developed to determine obscenity in Memoirs v Massachusetts?

Answer 17

A work is obscene if:

(1) The dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to prurient interest in sex;
(2) Material is patently offensive because it affronts contemporary community standards relating to the description or representation of sexual matters;
(3) Material is utterly without redeeming social value

[383 U.S. 413 (1966)]

Question 18

What is the test developed to determine obscenity in Miller v California?

Answer 18

A work is obscene if:

(1) Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;

(2) Whether the work
depicts or describes, in an offensive
way, sexual conduct or excretory functions, specifically defined by applicable state law; and

(3) Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value
[413 U.S. 15 (1973)]

Question 19

When will group libel apply?

Answer 19

Where the defamation is alleged to have been directed at a group or class, it is essential that the statement must be so sweeping or all-embracing as to apply to every individual in that group or class, or sufficiently specific so that each individual in the class or group can prove that the defamatory statement specifically pointed to him, so that he can bring the action separately, if need be

[Newsweek Inc. v. IAC, G.R. No. L-63559 (1986)].

Question 20

What are fighting words?

Answer 20

Fighting words refer to those words which, by their very utterance, inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.

Such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality.

[Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942)].

Question 21

What is the test for the existence of fighting words?

Answer 21

The test is what men of common intelligence would understand would be words likely to cause an average addressee to fight.

Question 22

What is the difference bet. Content-based and Content-neutral Regulations?

Answer 22

Content-based:
Regulation of the subject matter of utterance
or speech

Content-neutral:
Regulations of the incidents of speech – time, place, manner

Question 23

What is the standard of review for content-base regulations?

Answer 23

Strict scrutiny

Question 24

What is the standard of review for content-neutrall regulations?

Answer 24

Not overbroad or vague

Question 25

What are tests for Content-based regulations?

Answer 25

a. Clear and present danger
Tests
b. Balancing of interests
c. Dangerous tendency
d. Direct incitement

Question 26

What are the tests for content-neutral regulationa?

Answer 26

O’Brien test

Question 27

What are criticisms are allowed by the Court?

Answer 27

Criticisms made in good faith. Courts and judges are not sacrosanct. They should and expect critical evaluation of their performance. For like the executive and the legislative branches, the judiciary is rooted in the soil of democratic society, nourished by the periodic appraisal of the citizen whom it is expected to serve.

But it is the cardinal condition of all such criticism that it shall be bona fide and shall not spill over the walls of decency and propriety. A wide chasm exists between fair criticism, on the one hand, and abuse and slander of courts and the judges thereof, on the other [In Re: Almacen, G.R. No. 27654 (1970)].

Question 28

What are content-neutral regulations?

Answer 28

Regulations on the incidents of speech — time, place, and manner — under well-defined standards [Newsounds Broadcasting Network v. Dy, supra].

Question 29

What is required for content-neutral regulation to be valid?

Answer 29

When the speech restraints take the form of a content-neutral regulation, only a substantial governmental interest is required for its validity. Because regulations of this type are not designed to suppress any particular message, they are not subject to the strictest form of judicial scrutiny but an intermediate approach — somewhere between the mere rationality that is required of any other law and the compelling interest standard applied to contentbased restrictions [Chavez v. Gonzales, supra].

Question 30

Can city or town mayors refuse to grant permit for a parade or meeting on public placess?

Answer 30

NO.

The right to freedom of speech and to peacefully assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances are fundamental personal rights of the people guaranteed by the constitutions of democratic countries. City or town mayors are not conferred the power to refuse to grant the permit, but only the discretion in issuing the permit to determine or specify the streets or public places where the parade may pass or the meeting may be held [Primicias v. Fugoso, G.R. No. L-1800 (1948)].

Question 31

When is the grant of permit presumed?

Answer 31

…… rallyists who are able to show the police an application duly filed on a given date can, after two (2) days from said date, rally in accordance with their application without the need to show a permit, the grant of the permit being then presumed under the law. It will be the burden of the authorities to show that there has been a denial of the application, in which case the rally may be peacefully dispersed following the procedure of maximum tolerance provided by the law [Bayan v. Ermita, supra].

Question 32

What is the general rule on when a question to a statute is valid?

Answer 32

General Rule: A party can question the validity of a statute only if, as applied to him, it is unconstitutional

[Southern Hemisphere v. Anti-Terrorism Council, G.R. No. 178552 (2010)].

Question 33

What is the exception to the general rule that “A party can question the validity of a statute only if, as applied to him, it is unconstitutional”?

Answer 33

Facial challenges

Question 34

When is a facial challenge to a statute valid?

Answer 34

A facial challenge may be directed against a vague statute or to one which is overbroad because of the
possible “chilling effect” the statute will have on protected speech. The theory is that “[w]hen statutes regulate or proscribe speech and no readily apparent construction suggests itself as a vehicle for rehabilitating the statutes in a single prosecution, the transcendent value to all society of constitutionally protected expression is deemed to justify allowing attacks on overly broad statutes with no requirement that the person making the attack demonstrate that his own conduct could not be regulated by a statute drawn with narrow specificity” [Gooding v. Wilson, 405 U.S. 518 (1972)].

Question 35

Can a facial challenge apply to a criminal statute?

Answer 35

NO.

This rationale does not apply to penal statutes without a free speech aspect. Criminal statutes have general in terrorem effect resulting from their very existence and, if facial challenges were allowed for this reason alone, the State may well be prevented from enacting laws against socially harmful conduct. In the area of criminal law, the law cannot take chances as in the area of free speech [Southern Hemisphere v. AntiTerrorism Council, supra].

Question 36

When can a facial challenge apply to penal statutes?

Answer 36

a. The statute is challenged as applied; or

b. The statute involves free speech [Disini v. Sec. of Justice, supra].

Question 37

What is the overbreadth doctrine?

Answer 37

The statute must be carefully drawn or be authoritatively construed to punish only unprotected speech and not be susceptible of application to protected expression [Gooding v. Wilson, supra].

A law may be invalidated as overbroad if a substantial number of its applications are unconstitutional, judged in relation to the statute’s plainly legitimate sweep [US v. Stevens, 559 U.S. 460 (2010)].

A governmental purpose may not be achieved through means which sweep too broadly and thereby invade the area of protected freedoms.

Question 38

What is the Void for Vagueness Doctrine?

Answer 38

A statute establishing a criminal offense must define the offense with sufficient definiteness that persons of ordinary intelligence can understand what conduct is prohibited by the statute. It can only be invoked against that specie of legislation that is utterly vague on its face, i.e. that which cannot be clarified either by a saving clause or by construction.

Question 39

When may a statute or act be said to be vague?

Answer 39

A statute or act may be said to be vague when it lacks comprehensible standards that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ in its application

[Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560 (2001)].

Question 40

What are the tests under the freedom of expression?

Answer 40

a. Clear and Present Danger Test
b. Balancing of Interests Test
c. Dangerous Tendency Test
e. O’Brien Test (Intermediate Approach)

Question 41

What is the Clear and Present Danger Test?

Answer 41

It is a showing of a substantive and imminent evil, not hypothetical fears. Only when the challenged act has overcome the clear and present danger rule will it pass constitutional muster, with the government having the burden of overcoming the presumed unconstitutionality [Chavez v. Gonzales, supra].

This rule also requires that “the danger created must not only be clear and present but also traceable to the ideas expressed” [Gonzales v. COMELEC, supra].

The evil consequence of the comment or utterance must be “extremely serious and the degree of imminence extremely high” before the utterance can be punished. The danger to be guarded against is the “substantive evil” sought to be prevented. And this evil is primarily the “disorderly and unfair administration of justice.” […] Under this rule, the advocacy of ideas cannot constitutionally be abridged unless there is a clear and present danger that such advocacy will harm the administration of justice [Cabansag v. Fernandez, supra].

Question 42

What is the balacing of interest Test?

Answer 42

When a particular conduct is regulated in the interest of public order, and the regulation results in an indirect, conditional and partial abridgement of speech, the duty of the courts is to determine which of the two conflicting interests demands greater protection [American Communications v. Douds, 339 U.S. 282 (1950)].

The test is applied when two legitimate values not involving national security crimes compete [Gonzales v. COMELEC, supra].

Question 43

What is the Dangerous Tendency Test?

Answer 43

In each case, courts must ask whether the gravity of the “evil”, discounted by its improbability, justifies such invasion of free speech as is necessary to avoid the danger [Dennis v. US, 341 U.S. 494 (1951)].

Under this test, the question is whether the words will create a dangerous tendency that the state has a right to prevent. It looks at the probability that a substantive evil will result, and it is not necessary that some definite or immediate acts of force, violence, or unlawfulness be advocated [Cabansag v. Fernandez, supra].

It is sufficient if the natural tendency and the probable effect of the utterance were to bring about the substantive evil that the legislative body seeks to prevent [People v. Perez, supra].

Question 44

What is the Direct Incitement Test?

Answer 44

The constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action [Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969)].

It is incumbent on the court to make clear in some fashion that the advocacy must be of action and not merely of abstract doctrine [Yates v. US, 354 U.S. 298 (1957)].

Political discussion even among those opposed to the present administration is within the protective clause of freedom of speech and expression. The same cannot be construed as subversive activities per se or as evidence of membership in a subversive organization [Salonga v. Cruz Paño, G.R. No. L-59524 (1985)].

Question 45

What is the O’Brien Test (Intermediate Approach)?

Answer 45

A government regulation is sufficiently justified if:

1. It is within the constitutional power;
2. It furthers an important or substantial government interest;
3. The government interest is unrelated to the suppression of free expression;
4. The incident restriction is no greater than essential to the furtherance of that interest [US v. O’Brien, supra].

Question 46

[FIB}
Sec. 11(1), Art. XVI. The _________________ of mass media shall be limited to _______ of the Philippines, or to corporations, cooperatives or associations, ___________________ such citizens.

Answer 46

ownership and management;
citizens;
wholly-owned and managed by

Sec. 11(1), Art. XVI. The _________________ of mass media shall be limited to _______ of the Philippines, or to corporations, cooperatives or associations, ___________________ such citizens.

Question 47

Sec. 11(2), Art. XVI

The Congress shall regulate or prohibit ________ in commercial mass media when the _______ so requires. No ____________ or ____________ therein shall be allowed.

Answer 47

monopolies;
public interest;
combinations in restraint of trade;
unfair competition;

The Congress shall regulate or prohibit ________ in commercial mass media when the _______ so requires. No ____________ or ____________ therein shall be allowed.

Question 48

Sec. 11(3), Art. XVI

The advertising industry is impressed with _______, and shall be regulated by ____ for the protection of _________ and the promotion of the ______________

Answer 48

public interest;
law;
consumers;
general welfare;

The advertising industry is impressed with _______, and shall be regulated by ____ for the protection of _________ and the promotion of the ______________

Question 49

Sec. 11(4), Art. XVI

Only __________ or corporations or associations at least _______________ of the capital of which is owned by such citizens shall be allowed to engage in the advertising industry.

Answer 49

Filipino citizens;
seventy per centum;

Only __________ or corporations or associations at least _______________ of the capital of which is owned by such citizens shall be allowed to engage in the advertising industry.

Question 50

Sec. 11(5), Art. XVI

The participation of foreign investors in the governing body of entities in such industry shall be limited to their ______________________ thereof, and all the ___________________ of such entities must be citizens of the Philippines.

Answer 50

proportionate share in the capital;
executive and managing officers

The participation of foreign investors in the governing body of entities in such industry shall be limited to their ______________________ thereof, and all the ___________________ of such entities must be citizens of the Philippines.

Question 51

Which is lesser? freedom of broadcast of freedom of the press?

Answer 51

The Court pronounced that the freedom of broadcast media is lesser than that of the press because of its pervasive presence in the lives of people and because of their accessibility to children.

Question 52

What are the four aspects of Freedom of the Press?

Answer 52

a. Freedom from prior restraint;
b. Freedom from punishment subsequent to publication;
c. Freedom of access to information; and
d. Freedom of circulation

[Chavez v. Gonzales, supra]

Question 53

What is the difference bet print and broadcast media?

Answer 53

While all forms of communication are entitled to the broad protection of freedom of expression clause, the freedom of film, television, and radio broadcasting is somewhat lesser than the freedom accorded to
newspapers and other print media [Chavez v. Gonzales, supra].

Radio and television are accorded less protection because of:
a. The scarcity of the frequencies by which the medium operates, i.e., airwaves are physically limited while print medium may be limitless;

b. Its pervasiveness as a medium; and
c. Its unique accessibility to children [FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978)].

But all forms of media, whether print or broadcast, are entitled to the broad protection of the freedom of expression clause. The test for limitations on freedom of expression continues to be the clear and present danger test [Eastern Broadcasting v. Dans, Jr., supra].

Question 54

When is censorship allowed?

Answer 54

Censorship is allowable only under the clearest proof of a clear and present danger of a substantive evil to public safety, morals, health, or any other legitimate public interest:

a. There should be no doubt that what is feared may be traced to the expression complained of;

b. Also, there must be reasonable apprehension about its imminence. It does not suffice that the
danger is only probable [Gonzalez v. Katigbak, supra].

Question 55

When is limited intrusion into a person’s privacy permissible?

Answer 55

Limited intrusion into a person’s privacy is permissible when that person is a public figure and the information sought to be published is of a public character.

What is protected is the right to be free from unwarranted publicity, from the wrongful publicizing of the private affairs of an individual which are outside the realm of public concern [Ayer Prod. PTY. LTD. v. Judge Capulong, supra].

Question 56

What gave the MTRCB power to screen, review, and examine all television programs?

Answer 56

P.D. No. 1986 gave the MTRCB the power to screen, review, and examine all television programs.

Question 57

Why are strict rules allowed in radio censorship?

Answer 57

Strict rules have also been allowed for radio because of its pervasive quality and because of the interest in the protection of children [FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, supra (1978)].

Question 58

Is commercial speech accorded the same level of protection as that given to other consititutionally guaranteed forms of expression?

Answer 58

Commercial speech is a separate category of speech which is not accorded the same level of protection as that given to other constitutionally guaranteed forms of expression but is nonetheless entitled to protection.

Question 59

What is the test to be applied to regulations on commercial speech?

Answer 59

Central Hudson Gas & Elec. v. Public Svc. Comm’n [447 U.S. 557 (1980)] established the test to be applied to regulations on commercial speech:

a. Speech must not be false, misleading, or proposing an illegal activity;
b. Government interest sought to be served by regulation must be substantial;
c. The regulation must advance government interest; and
d. The regulation must not be overbroad.

Question 60

Can a tarpaulin posted by a citizen who is neither an electoral candidate nor sponsored by any electorate candidate be regulated by COMELEC?

Answer 60

COMELEC does not have the authority to regulate the enjoyment of the right to freedom of expression exercised by citizens who are neither electoral candidates nor sponsored by any electoral candidate. A tarpaulin that expresses a political opinion constitutes political speech. Speech that promotes dialogue on public affairs, or airs out grievances and political discontent, should be protected and encouraged

[Diocese of Bacolod v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 205728 (2015)].

Question 61

What is the difference bet. political speech and commercial speech?

Answer 61

Political speech refers to speech “both intended and received as a contribution to public deliberation about some issue,”200 “foster[ing] informed and civicminded deliberation.”

On the other hand, commercial speech has been defined as speech that does “no more than propose a commercial transaction.”

Question 62

What is parliamentary immunity?

Answer 62

Parliamentary immunity guarantees the members of Congress the freedom of expression without fear of being held responsible in criminal or civil actions before courts or fora outside of Congress, but this does not protect them from being held responsible by the legislative body. The members may nevertheless be questioned in Congress itself.

For unparliamentary conduct, members of the Congress have been or could be censured, committed to prison, or even expelled by the votes of their colleagues [Osmeña v. Pendatun, G.R. No. L-17144 (1960)].

Question 63

What does ‘speech or debate’ refer to in parliamentary immunity?

Answer 63

Speech or debate refers to speeches, statements, or votes made within Congress while it is in session, or duly authorized actions of congressmen in the discharge of their duties [Jimenez v. Cabangbang, G.R. No. L-15905 (1966)].

Question 64

What is a Heckler’s Veto?

Answer 64

Heckler’s veto is an attempt to limit unpopular speech. This occurs when an acting party’s right to freedom of speech is curtailed or restricted by the government in order to prevent a reacting party’s behavior.

For example, an unpopular group wants to hold a rally and asks for a permit. The government is not allowed to refuse the permit based on the beliefs of the applicants, but the government may deny the permit on the ground of fear that many people will be outraged and cause violent protests, not because the government disapproves of the group’s message. Under the free speech clause, the government may not silence speech based on the reaction (or anticipated reaction) of a hostile audience, unless there is a clear and present danger of grave and imminent harm, which is not easy to prove.