Inciting a crowd to violence is not protected speech because it can lead to which of the following?
|
"Imminent lawless action" is one of several legal standards American courts use to determine whether certain speech is protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The standard was first established in 1969 in the United States Supreme Court case Brandenburg v. Ohio.[1][2] Show
History[edit]Brandenburg clarified what constituted a "clear and present danger", the standard established by Schenck v. United States (1919), and overruled Whitney v. California (1927), which had held that speech that merely advocated violence could be made illegal. Under the imminent lawless action test, speech is not protected by the First Amendment if the speaker intends to incite a violation of the law that is both imminent and likely. While the precise meaning of "imminent" may be ambiguous in some cases, the court provided later clarification in Hess v. Indiana (1973) in which the court found that Hess's words were protected under "his rights to free speech",[3] in part, because his speech "amounted to nothing more than advocacy of illegal action at some indefinite future time,"[3] and therefore did not meet the imminence requirement. The two legal prongs that constitute incitement of imminent lawless action are as follows: Advocacy of force or criminal activity does not receive First Amendment protections if (1) the advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and (2) is likely to incite or produce such action.[4]Quotation[edit]
See also[edit]
References[edit]
Further reading[edit]
External links[edit]
 Why would inciting a crowd to violence not be protected speech quizlet?Inciting a crowd to violence would not be protected speech because it violates: prior restraint. In Miller v. California, the Supreme Court ruled that material could be considered obscene if it met all of the following requirements except: the work could be accessed by minors.
What type of speech is not protected because it has the tendency to immediately incite violence?The fighting words category is an exceedingly limited classification of speech, encompassing only face-to-face communications that would obviously provoke an immediate and violent reaction, such that both speaker and provoked listener would be in violation of the law.
Which of the following is not protected speech?Obscenity. Fighting words. Defamation (including libel and slander) Child pornography.
Which doctrine is used to place limits on speech that will incite violence?The fighting words doctrine allows government to limit speech when it is likely to incite immediate violence or retaliation by the recipients of the words.
|
