Freedom of Expression & Assembly Flashcards
because these rights are maintained for the expectation of privacy, they are given primacy
all rights are equal yet we give more primacy as they apply to the very core of our indiviudal contribution to society (PRIMUS INTER PARES)
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
legal basis
section 4
No law shall be passed
abridging the freedom of speech, of expression,
or of the press, or the right of the people
peaceably to assemble and petition the
government for redress of grievances.
There are two rights in section 4 that are distinct rights and their mechanics
- freedom of EXPRESSION
- freedom of ASSEMBLY
freedom of EXPRESSION
note
in the context under the constitution and not international law yet
targeted at law making:
“No law shall be passed
abridging the freedom of [sep] speech, of expression,
or of the press”
law + abridging + freedom of [sep]
each of these are elements
note
sep - speech, expression press
> freedom of expression (> LAW)
- national
- local
the gov’t’s exercise of its POLICE POWER
( ABRIDGING)
two types of governmental act
- prior restraint
- subsequent punishment
IOW, no law providing prior restraint or a subsequent punishment
(> freedom of [sep])
- shall not infringe PROTECTED SPEECH
while there is the presence of FoS, it is in the context of the common good.
IOW, this speech in the context of the common good (not absolute individual right) then this is protected speech which necessarily means there is a UNprotected speech
what is:
[a] prior restraint
[b] subsequent punishment
[a] gov’t could put a restraint BEFORE you enjoy that right
- the right is enjoyed the very moment that you express yourself
[b]
subsequent punishment, which is a gov’t action in law providing a punishment after your expression
when is there PROTECTED Speech?
GEN: generally ALL speech is protected
GEN2: protected speech with abridging (or that gov’t action), it would be [[presumed]] UNconstitutional
EXC
1. Low-value expression
2. Libel
3. Obscene Speech
note
- based on Philippine JP, “hate speech” is another example in the international law.
> presumed unconstitutional >
they must be questioned in court so that they become presumed unconstitutional.
there must be a case filed.
in the questioning,
needs a case file in court against a particular law
JP provides the modes of questioning laws that place [a] prior restraint [b] subsequent punishment on protected speech and they are questioned in court.
What are the 2 modes of questoining
- as applied
- facial challenged
> presumed unconstitutional > questoined in court > as applied
as general rule, the law must be applied before it would be questioned because the question of the unapplied law will not mature for the court.
in cases involving laws imposing [a] & [b] to protected speech, those laws may be questoined in court using a FACIAL CHALLENGE
facial challenge
on its face, it
UINISERT HERE
so sec 4 prohibits prior restraint and subsequent punishment on speeches taht are PROTECTED.
but if the speech is UNprotected, prior restraint, subsequent punishment is allowed
INSERT HERE
what constitutes PROTECTED SPEECH
is it only oral? how about action, illustration
PROTECTED SPEECH
[A] Contents
- political
- commercial (lawful trade, not misleading/false)
[B] as to FORM
- oral
- written
- illustration
- symbols
- media
GENERALLY, they are PROTECTED. However certain types of speech, regardless of content or form, will not be protected by section 4
protect speech > content > commercial trade
what if it is unlawful trade, mislaeding/false?
it becoms UNPROTECTD SPEECH
GENERALLY, they are PROTECTED. However certain types of speech, regardless of content or form, will not be protected by section 4
if that FORM or CONTENT
- low-value expressions
- libel
- obscene speech
GEN2: protected speech with abridging (or that gov’t action), it would be [[presumed]] UNconstitutional
what is the effect of “presumed”?
it can be overturned or rebutted
how to overturn that presumption
note
so this means there is a gov’t act on the protected speech
being presumed, the gov’t has an opportunity to show that its act (in the form of the law) abridging protected speech is CONSTITUTINOAL
how then can the gov’t do that?
classify the law that law in prior restraint or subsequent punishment or both into:
a. Content-Neutral
b. Content-Based
law + abridinging + protected speech > classification b (content based)
if it places prior restraint / subsequent punishemtn based on the
“SUBJECT MATTER”
Law says “no person shall make bomb jokes in airports” (there is place but it’s more on the CONTENT/subject matter”
you cannot express bomb jokes in the airport
law + abridinging + protected speech > classification b (content NEUTRAL )
all other incidents of speech other than the subject matter
considers:
- time,
- place
- manner,
not the subject matter
ex.
- “no more person may validly campaign in the streets (place),
- no person can campaign before and after campaigning period (time)
- no campaign using 10ft in height (manner)
what is the relevance of differentiating CN & CB?
gov’t has classified because the hurdle differs between CN & CB
CN - intermediate review
CB
- strict scrutiny review