Free Speech

Case - 564 U.S. 786

Parties: EDMUND G. BROWN, Jr., GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Petitioners v. ENTERTAINMENT MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION et al.

Date: 2011-06-27

Identifiers:

Opinions:

Segment Sets:

Paragraph: 7 - And whatever the challenges of applying the Constitution to ever-advancing technology, "the basic principles of freedom of speech and the press, like the First Amendment's command, do not vary" when a new and different medium for communication appears.

Notes:

Preferred Terms:

  • (is) press
  • (is) speech

Phrase match: of freedom of speech and the

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20110627.564.US.786.xml&keyword1=freedom of&wordsBefore=1&wordsAfter=3#m1

Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk

Paragraph: 12 - That is of course the same expansive view of governmental power to abridge the freedom of speech based on interest balancing that we rejected in Stevens.  [***LEdHR6] [6] Our opinion in Winters, which concluded that the New York statute failed a heightened vagueness standard applicable to restrictions upon speech entitled to First Amendment protection, 333 U.S., at 517-519, 68 S. Ct. 665, 92 L. Ed. 840, made clear that violence is not part of the obscenity that the Constitution permits to be regulated.

Notes:

Preferred Terms:

  • (reg) obscenity
  • (is) violent speech

Phrase match: the freedom of speech based on

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20110627.564.US.786.xml&keyword1=freedom of&wordsBefore=1&wordsAfter=3#m1

Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk

Paragraph: 100 - The practices and beliefs of the founding generation establish that "the freedom of speech," as originally understood, does not include a right to speak to minors (or a right of minors to access speech) without going through the minors' parents or guardians. I would hold that the law at issue is not facially unconstitutional under the First Amendment, and reverse and remand for further proceedings.

Notes:

Preferred Terms:

  • (is not) communicating with minors without parental consent

Phrase match: the freedom of speech," as originally

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20110627.564.US.786.xml&keyword1=freedom of&wordsBefore=1&wordsAfter=3#m1

Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk

Paragraph: 104 - The historical evidence shows that the founding generation believed parents had absolute authority over their minor children and expected parents to use that authority to direct the proper development of their children. It would be absurd to suggest that such a society understood "the freedom of speech" to include a right  [***735] to speak to minors (or a corresponding right of minors to access speech) without going through the minors' parents.

Notes:

Preferred Terms:

  • (is not) communicating with minors without parental consent

Phrase match: the freedom of speech" to include

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20110627.564.US.786.xml&keyword1=freedom of&wordsBefore=1&wordsAfter=3#m1

Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk

Paragraph: 142 - In light of this history, the Framers could not possibly have understood "the freedom of speech" to include an unqualified right to speak to minors.

Notes:

Preferred Terms:

  • (is not) communicating with minors without parental consent

Phrase match: the freedom of speech" to include

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20110627.564.US.786.xml&keyword1=freedom of&wordsBefore=1&wordsAfter=3#m1

Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk

Paragraph: 100 - But I do not think the First Amendment stretches that far. The practices and beliefs of the founding generation establish that "the freedom of speech," as originally understood, does not include a right to speak to minors (or a right of minors to access speech) without going through the minors' parents or guardians.

Notes:

Preferred Terms:

  • (is not) Speech to Minors

Phrase match: a right of minors to access

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20110627.564.US.786.xml&keyword1=right of&wordsBefore=1&wordsAfter=3#m1

Search time: 2018-03-15 12:38:56 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef Segmenter: ars9ef

Paragraph: 148 - But this Court has never held, until today, that "the freedom of speech" includes a right to speak to minors (or a right of minors to access speech) without going through the minors' parents. To the contrary, "[i]t is well settled that a State or municipality can adopt more stringent controls on communicative materials available to youths than on those available to adults."

Notes:

Preferred Terms:

  • (why not) Speech to Minors
  • (reg) Speech to Minors

Phrase match: a right of minors to access

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20110627.564.US.786.xml&keyword1=right of&wordsBefore=1&wordsAfter=3#m1

Search time: 2018-03-15 12:38:56 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef Segmenter: ars9ef

Paragraph: 100 - The practices and beliefs of the founding generation establish that "the freedom of speech," as originally understood, does not include a right to speak to minors (or a right of minors to access speech) without going through the minors' parents or guardians.

Notes:

Preferred Terms:

  • (reg) Speech to Minors

Phrase match: a right to speak to minors

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20110627.564.US.786.xml&keyword1=right to&wordsBefore=1&wordsAfter=3#m1

Search time: 2018-01-12 14:48:12 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk

Paragraph: 13 - Because speech about violence is  [***717] not obscene, it is of no consequence that California's statute mimics the New York statute regulating obscenity for minors that we upheld in Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629, 88

Notes:

Preferred Terms:

  • (is) speech about violence

Phrase match: Because speech about violence is

Source: http://freespeech.iath.virginia.edu/exist-speech/cocoon/freespeech/FOS_newSTerms_One?doc=/db/fos_all/federal/SC/2000s/20110627.564.US.786.xml&keyword1=speech&wordsBefore=2&wordsAfter=3#m1

Search time: 2017-11-10 14:59:38 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk

Paragraph: 13 - N129* We   held that the legislature could N130* "adjus[t] the definition of obscenity N131* 'to social realities by permitting the appeal of this type of material to be assessed in terms of the sexual interests . . .' of . . . minors." Id., at 638, 88 S. Ct. 1274, 20 L. Ed. 2d 195 (quoting Mishkin v. New York, 383 U.S. 502, 509, 86 S. Ct. 958, 16 L. Ed. 2d 56 (1966)). And because "obscenity is not protected expression," the New York statute could be sustained so long as the legislature's judgment that the proscribed materials were harmful to children "was not irrational."

Notes:

  • N129* / / / / Here, "adjusting" a term's definition is interesting.
  • N130* / quote / endorsement / Q0594 /
  • N131* / quote / endorsement / Q0593 /

Preferred Terms:

  • (is not) Obscenity

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.786.xml&keyword1= expression protected expression&wordsBefore=&wordsAfter=#m1

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