Civil Liberties

mahatmakanejeeves

(61,295 posts) Thu May 19, 2022, 02:17 PM May 2022

1A: I protect hate speech, incendiary speech, and screaming "fire" in a crowded theater, unless ...

I protect hate speech, incendiary speech, and screaming “fire” in a crowded theater, all unless it is intended to and likely to cause imminent lawless action, which is a very high bar that protects almost everything people claim is like screaming “fire.”

Link to tweet

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

1A: I protect hate speech, incendiary speech, and screaming "fire" in a crowded theater, unless ... (Original Post) mahatmakanejeeves May 2022 OP

unless it is intended to and likely to cause imminent lawless action unweird May 2022 #1

One more thing: mahatmakanejeeves May 2022 #2

The actual quote from Schenck v United States (1919) is rsdsharp May 2022 #3

unweird

(2,976 posts)

1. unless it is intended to and likely to cause imminent lawless action

Reply to mahatmakanejeeves (Original post)

Thu May 19, 2022, 02:29 PM

May 2022

Isn’t that where we are at?

unless it is intended to and likely to cause imminent lawless action…

mahatmakanejeeves

(61,295 posts)

2. One more thing:

Reply to mahatmakanejeeves (Original post)

Thu May 19, 2022, 02:47 PM

May 2022

If you come back at free speech arguments with “You can’t shout fire in a crowded theater”, I’m gonna need you to go all the way and endorse jailing people who publicly oppose a wartime draft, since that’s the ruling in which Oliver Wendell Holmes coined this particular metaphor.

Link to tweet

rsdsharp

(10,239 posts)

3. The actual quote from Schenck v United States (1919) is

Reply to mahatmakanejeeves (Reply #2)

Thu May 19, 2022, 04:23 PM

May 2022

“The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic....”

People alway delete “falsely”, and add “crowded.”

And while Schenck did find opposition to the draft violated the 1917 Espionage Act, its holding has been at least limited by Brandenburg v Ohio.

Reply to this discussion