Parties: Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition
Date: 2002-04-16
Identifiers:
Opinions:
Segment Sets:
Paragraph: 15 - The freedom of speech has its limits; it does not embrace certain categories of speech, including defamation, incitement, obscenity, and pornography produced with real children. See Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of N. Y. State Crime Victims Bd., 502 U. S. 105, 127 (1991) (KENNEDY, J., concurring). While these categories may be prohibited without violating the First Amendment, none of them includes the speech prohibited by the CPPA. In his dissent from the opinion of the Court of Appeals, Judge Ferguson recognized this to be the law and proposed that virtual child pornography should be regarded as an additional category of unprotected speech.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: The freedom of speech has its
Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 29 - The right to think is the beginning of freedom, and speech must be protected from the government because speech is the beginning of thought.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: thoughtThe right to think is the
Search time: 2018-01-12 14:48:12 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 28 - The Government cannot ban speech fit for adults simply because it may fall into the hands of children.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: cannot ban speech fit for adults
Search time: 2017-11-10 14:59:38 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 14 - It is also well established that speech may not be prohibited because it concerns subjects offending our sensibilities. See FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U. S. 726, 745 (1978) N107* ("[T]he fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it"); see also Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 874 (1997) N108* ("In evaluating the free speech rights of adults, we have made it perfectly clear that N109* `[s]exual expression which is indecent but not obscene is protected by the First Amendment'")
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match:
Search time: 2018-04-26 09:34:45 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 34 - The Government may not suppress lawful speech as the means to suppress unlawful speech. protected speech does not become unprotected merely because it resembles the latter. The Constitution requires the reverse.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match:
Search time: 2018-04-12 08:37:53 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 29 - The right to think is the beginning of freedom, and speech must be protected from the government because speech is the beginning of thought.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match:
Search time: 2018-04-12 08:37:53 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 14 - The prospect of crime, however, by itself does not justify laws suppressing protected speech. See Kingsley Int'l Pictures Corp. v. Regents of Univ. of N. Y., 360 U. S. 684, 689 (1959) ("Among free men, the deterrents ordinarily to be applied to prevent crime are education and punishment for violations of the law, not abridgment of the rights of free speech" (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)).
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match:
Search time: 2018-04-12 08:37:53 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk