Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Ideally, suppressing speech is considered wrong, but in some cases, it is necessary to restrict speech for the greater good of society. It must be decided that the speech is a nuisance in regard to its time, place, or manner of delivery, such as creating a clear and present danger.
Brennan is wrong, however. This idea that Germany, during the period between World War I and World War II, was some free speech paradise—and that the Nazis used this to their advantage—is ...
Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information. This may be done on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient". [2] [3] [4] Censorship can be conducted by governments [5] and private institutions. [6]
President Donald Trump on Monday signed an executive order banning “federal censorship” of online speech, drawing praise from supporters who say the Biden administration illegally suppressed ...
In the United States, censorship involves the suppression of speech or public communication and raises issues of freedom of speech, which is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Interpretation of this fundamental freedom has varied since its enshrinement. Traditionally, the First Amendment was regarded as applying ...
On Tuesday, a Louisiana federal judge ruled that the Biden administration could not quietly contact social media sites like Twitter and Facebook to remove protected free speech. Some saw this as ...
The government is not permitted to fire an employee based on the employee's speech if three criteria are met: the speech addresses a matter of public concern; the speech is not made pursuant to the employee's job duties, but rather the speech is made in the employee's capacity as a citizen; [47] and the damage inflicted on the government by the ...
But political speech by its nature will sometimes have unpalatable consequences, and, in general, our society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuse.”