Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. [1] The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action".
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.
King v. Smith; Levy v. Louisiana; Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) - Amicus curiae for John W. Terry; Washington v. Lee; 1969 Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969) - represented Clarence Brandenburg; Gregory v. Chicago; Street v. New York; Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969) - represented the ...
Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Commission on Human Relations (1973) Lehman v. Shaker Heights (1974) Bigelow v. Commonwealth of Virginia (1974) Virginia State Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council (1976) Bates v. State Bar of Arizona (1977) Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Willingboro (1977) Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Assn. (1978 ...
I care less whether fair maps are done by "politicians" or by "citizens" − but it surely will not happen if Issue 1 passes.
Abrams v. United States , 250 U.S. 616 (1919), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States upholding the criminal arrests of several defendants under the Sedition Act of 1918 , which was an amendment to the Espionage Act of 1917 .
Today's letters: Ohio State smothers visiting teams. Trump, Vance don't get how tariffs work.
A federal judge did not issue a ruling following a hearing Tuesday at which five unions sought a temporary restraining order to keep the Trump administration from carrying out mass layoffs across ...