Free Speech - Case - 132 S. Ct. 2307

Case - 132 S. Ct. 2307

Parties: FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, et al., Petitioners v. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC., et al.FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, et al., Petitioners v. ABC, INC., et al.

Date: 2012-06-21

Identifiers:

132 S. Ct. 2307 (Supreme Court Reporter)
183 L. Ed. 2d 234
2012 U.S. LEXIS 4661
80 U.S.L.W. 4494
40 Media L. Rep. 1881
23 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 420
56 Comm. Reg. (P & F) 331

Opinions:

Majority: Abstention - Sotomayor, Sonia Maria, 1954-
Majority: Author - Kennedy, Anthony McLeod, 1936-
Concurrence: Author - Ginsburg, Ruth Bader, 1933-

Segment Sets:

Paragraph: 21 - Even when speech is not at issue, the void for vagueness doctrine addresses at least two connected but discrete due process concerns: first, that regulated parties should know what is required of them so they may act accordingly; second, precision and guidance are necessary so [***25] that those enforcing the law do not act in an arbitrary or discriminatory way. See Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U. S. 104, 108-109, 92 S. Ct. 2294, 33 L. Ed. 2d 222 (1972). When speech is involved, rigorous adherence to those requirements is necessary to ensure that ambiguity does not chill protected speech.

Notes:

Preferred Terms:

(reg) Requirements for Regulating Speech

Phrase match:

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20120621.132.SCt.2307.xml&keyword1= speech protected speech&wordsBefore=&wordsAfter=#m1

Search time: 2018-04-12 08:37:53 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk