Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The government speech doctrine establishes that the government may advance its speech without requiring viewpoint neutrality when the government itself is the speaker. Thus, when the state is the speaker, it may make content based choices. The simple principle has broad implications, and has led to contentious disputes within the Supreme Court. [1]
The practice arises from a duty of the president under the State of the Union Clause of the U.S. Constitution: [8]. He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.
Term Description Examples Autocracy: Autocracy is a system of government in which supreme power (social and political) is concentrated in the hands of one person or polity, whose decisions are subject to neither external legal restraints nor regularized mechanisms of popular control (except perhaps for the implicit threat of a coup d'état or mass insurrection).
The government encouraging them to remove false speech only violates the 1st Amendment if it can be proved that the government caused, and will cause in the future, speech to be blocked.
Republican John McCain's 2008 concession speech to Democrat Barack Obama is frequently cited as a good example to follow. [7] [2] "The American people have spoken, and they have spoken clearly," McCain said. "A little while ago, I had the honor of calling Senator Barack Obama to congratulate him on being elected the next president of the ...
A government policy statement is a declaration of a government's political activities, plans and intentions relating to a concrete cause or, at the assumption of office, an entire legislative session. In certain countries they are announced by the head of government or a minister of the parliament.
Both cases pose the question of when speech by government officials violates the First Amendment. The leading Supreme Court precedent, Bantam Books v. Sullivan, was decided in 1963.
Symbolic speech is a legal term in United States law used to describe actions that purposefully and discernibly convey a particular message or statement to those viewing it. [1] Symbolic speech is recognized as being protected under the First Amendment as a form of speech, but this is not expressly written as such in the document.