Free Speech

Case - 564 U.S. 721

Parties: ARIZONA FREE ENTERPRISE CLUB'S FREEDOM CLUB PAC, et al., Petitioners (No. 10-238) v. KEN BENNETT, in his official capacity as ARIZONA SECRETARY OF STATE, et al., JOHN McCOMISH, et al., Petitioners (No. 10-239) v. KEN BENNETT, in his official capacity as ARIZONA SECRETARY OF STATE, et al.

Date: 2011-06-27

Identifiers:

Opinions:

Segment Sets:

Paragraph: 102 - In case after case, year upon year, we have distinguished between speech restrictions and speech subsidies. N128* " 'There is a basic difference,' " we have held, " 'between direct state interference with [First Amendment] protected activity and state encouragement' " of other expression.

Notes:

  • N128* / quote / endorsement / Q0592 /

Preferred Terms:

  • (why is) Legality of Speech Subsidies

Phrase match:

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20110627.564.US.721.xml&keyword1= expression protected expression&wordsBefore=&wordsAfter=#m1

Search time: 2018-04-26 09:34:45 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk

Paragraph: 78 - But the whole point of the First Amendment is to protect speakers against unjustified government restrictions on speech, even when those restrictions reflect the will of the majority. When it comes to protected speech, the speaker is sovereign.

Notes:

Preferred Terms:

  • (reg) Campaign Financing
  • (why is) Sovereignty of the Speaker

Phrase match:

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20110627.564.US.721.xml&keyword1= speech protected speech&wordsBefore=&wordsAfter=#m1

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