To change or withdraw your consent choices for Investopedia. At any time, you can update your settings through the "EU Privacy" link at the bottom of any page. These choices will be signaled globally to our partners and will not affect browsing data.
We and our partners process data to: Actively scan device characteristics for identification. I Accept Show Purposes. Your Money. Personal Finance. Your Practice. Popular Courses.
What is First Amendment? Article Sources. Investopedia requires writers to use primary sources to support their work. These include white papers, government data, original reporting, and interviews with industry experts.
We also reference original research from other reputable publishers where appropriate. The First Amendment is for everyone. The First Amendment prevents government from requiring you to say something you don't want to, or keeping you from hearing or reading the words of others even if you never speak out yourself, you have the right to receive information.
First Amendment Encyclopedia A comprehensive research compilation covering all aspects of First Amendment law. Want to support the Free Speech Center? Donate Now. The judge in the case involving CNN reporter Jim Acosta did not rule on the overall First Amendment issues involved in the matter, but instead ruled only on the Fifth Amendment issues, which grants people the right to due process. He said that although the case was not technically a First Amendment case, it was about the free press.
Load more comments. Search Search. Home United States U. Latest show. VOA Africa Listen live. VOA Newscasts Listen live. Previous Next. November 17, AM. There are generally three situations in which the government can constitutionally restrict speech under a less demanding standard. New York Times v. Sullivan Watts v. United States Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire But this does not include political statements that offend others and provoke them to violence.
For example, civil rights or anti-abortion protesters cannot be silenced merely because passersby respond violently to their speech. Cox v. Louisiana Obscenity: Hard-core, highly sexually explicit pornography is not protected by the First Amendment. Miller v.
California In practice, however, the government rarely prosecutes online distributors of such material. Child pornography: Photographs or videos involving actual children engaging in sexual conduct are punishable, because allowing such materials would create an incentive to sexually abuse children in order to produce such material.
New York v. Ferber Commercial advertising: Speech advertising a product or service is constitutionally protected, but not as much as other speech. Virginia Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Council The government can restrict speech under a less demanding standard when the speaker is in a special relationship to the government. For example, the speech of government employees and of students in public schools can be restricted, even based on content, when their speech is incompatible with their status as public officials or students.
A teacher in a public school, for example, can be punished for encouraging students to experiment with illegal drugs, and a government employee who has access to classified information generally can be prohibited from disclosing that information.
Pickering v. Board of Education The government can also restrict speech under a less demanding standard when it does so without regard to the content or message of the speech. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. FCC But not all content-neutral restrictions are viewed as reasonable; for example, a law prohibiting all demonstrations in public parks or all leafleting on public streets would violate the First Amendment.
0コメント