Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Under the Miller test, speech is unprotected if "the average person, applying contemporary community standards, [54] would find that the [subject or work in question], taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest", "the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions specifically defined by ...
The First Amendment protects the people to exercise their rights of free speech as well as the freedom of the press in journalistic practice. [12] Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1988 decision in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, schools been allowed to censor speech in student media for “legitimate pedagogical concern”. [1]
Whether the speech is sexually vulgar or obscene (Bethel School District v. Fraser). Whether the speech, if allowed as part of a school activity or function, would be contrary to the basic educational mission of the school (Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier). Each of these considerations has given rise to a separate mode of analysis, and in Morse v.
Hazelwood School District et al. v. Kuhlmeier et al., 484 U.S. 260 (1988), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States which held, in a 5–3 decision, that student speech in a school-sponsored student newspaper at a public high school could be censored by school officials without a violation of First Amendment rights if the school's actions were "reasonably related" to a ...
Compelled speech is a transmission of expression required by law. A related legal concept is protected speech . Just as freedom of speech protects free expression, in many cases it similarly protects an individual from being required to utter or otherwise express a thought with which that individual disagrees.
The test, as set forth in the Tinker opinion, asks the question: Did the speech or expression of the student "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school," or might it "reasonably have led school authorities to forecast substantial disruption of or material interference ...
[16] [18] Chafee argued in Free Speech in the United States that a better analogy in Schenck might be a man who stands in a theatre and warns the audience that there are not enough fire exits. [19] [20] In his introductory remarks to a 2006 debate in defense of free speech, writer Christopher Hitchens parodied the Holmes judgment by opening ...
Free Speech Coalition. [11] The PROTECT ACT attached an obscenity requirement under the Miller test or the variant test noted above to overcome this limitation. [12] The PROTECT Act allows sex offenders to be sentenced to a lifetime term of federal supervised release. Although targeted most directly at sex offenders, it the PROTECT Act affects ...