Unprotected Speech Flashcards
FITDOC
Fight words: Chaplinsky Incitement to violence: Brandenburg True threats: Virgina v. Black Defamation: NYT v. Sullivan Obscenity: Miller Child Pornography: Ferber
Fighthings words
Are words by their very utterance inflict injury
OR
tend to incitement immediate breach of peace
Incitement to violence
Conviction of incitement is constitutional, only if:
- Harm is imminent
- Speaker has intent to cause imminent harm
- The speech has likelihood of producing illegal action
True threat
True threats are not protected by First Amendment, gov’t may regulate
Intimidation = true threat when:
i. Speaker directs a threat To a person or group
ii. With intent of placing victim in fear of bodily harm or death
Elements of Defamation
Libel = written; Slander = oral
Elements of defamation:
i. False statement of fact that injures someone’s reputation
ii. False statement must be publicized
iii. False statement of or concerning the plaintiff
Defamation
NYT v. Sulllivan
Defamatory statements regarding official conduct of a public official are protected by the First Amendment BUT, plaintiff may recover damages if he proves:
- with clear and convincing clarity that
- statements were made with actual malice
Actual Malice (defamation)
Speaker knew statements were false
OR
Speaker had reckless disregard as to whether the statements were false
Who is a public official?
Those who appear to the public to have substantial responsibility for or control over the conduct of government affairs. Rosenblatt v. Baer
Public figures
Must show actual malice
Who is a public figure?
Person who voluntarily injects oneself or is drawn into a particular controversy and thereby becomes a public figure for a limited range of issues. Gertz v. Welch
Private figure, private matter
Not required to show actual malice to recover
Obscenity
Material is not protected by FA, if meets Miller Test:
- Material appeals to prurient interest (that which excites lustful thoughts)
- Material is patently offensive sexual conduct and is specifically defined by the statute
- Lacks serious value = Taken as a whole, the material lacks serious redeeming artistic, literary, political, or scientific value
Nudity
Nudity alone isn’t enough to make material legally obscene under the Miller test
Child Pornography
Ferber
RULE → Gov’t may prohibit the exhibition, sale, or distribution of child pornography even if it does not meet Miller test for obscenity
BECAUSE
(a) The gov’t has compelling interest in protecting the physical and psychological well-being of a minor
(b) Child pornography is closely related to child abuse because kids are harmed by the permanent record of their involvement in making the porno
Virtual child pornography
Under Ferber, virtual child pornography isn’t pornography because it doesn’t harm children
Virtual child porno doesn’t meet Miller test → so it’s protected speech → meaning gov’t can only regulate if the law meets strict scrutiny