Chapter 6

Chapter 6 - Feiner’s message caused a clear-and-present...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–8. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Chapter 6 Words of Provocation 1
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Provocation to Anger Hate speech Expression that insults and degrade groups. . . Controlling hate speech Cannot be eradicated Drive underground Much of it is protected political speech Supreme Court definition: Words that “by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.” 2
Background image of page 2
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire Chaplinsky conviction Supreme Count upheld ruling: Epithets likely to provoke physical retaliation are not protected under the First Amendment Chaplinsky’s comments were “fighting words,” their very utterance: Inflicted injury Worthwhile v. Worthless speech 3
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Notable Cases Terminiello v. Chicago (1949) Court: The conviction was based on an overbroad interpretation that violated free speech And, Terminiello was not creating a clear- and-present danger Feiner v. New York (1951) The Supreme Court upheld the conviction
Background image of page 4
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 6
Background image of page 7

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 8
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Feiner’s message caused a clear-and-present danger 4 Fighting Words Expression has Constitutional protection unless: It provokes another person to violence Or creates a clear-and-present danger Cohen’s jacket: The language was not “erotic” Was not directed at anyone in particular A person could choose not to look 5 Fighting Words Georgia statute vague and overbroad Cohen and Gooding more clearly defined the “fighting words” doctrine Be spoken to another person face-to-face And, incite an immediate breach of the peace The Court dropped the “inflict injury” on the sensibilities of others clause 6 Words that Wound College incidences Racist speech R.A.V. v. St. Paul 7 Threats Watts v. United States Virginia v. Black Other cases, other threats University conduct codes 8...
View Full Document

  • Spring '09
  • Reinardy
  • Supreme Court of the United States, First Amendment to the United States Constitution, immediate breach, Supreme Court definition

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 8

Chapter 6 - Feiner’s message caused a clear-and-present...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 8. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online