Freedom Of Speech In Public Nuisance Law

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear” (George Orwell). Whether the opinion is of extreme offense or not, censorship is not the answer nor is the limitation of the freedom of speech. Emerging the truth, can only be possible through the opposition of ideas, thus with no boundries, the full protection of freedom of speech is a necessary quality of any society.

According to “Freedom of Speech” by Gerald Leinwand, Abraham Lincoln once asked, “Must a government, of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its people, or too weak to maintain its own existence (7)?” This question is particularly appropriate when considering what is perhaps the most sacred of all our Constitutionally guaranteed rights, freedom of expression. Lincoln knew well the potential dangers of expression, having steered the Union through the bitterly divisive Civil War, but he held the Constitution dear enough to protect its promises whenever possible (8).

Is the freedom of speech given to everyone? Or is preferential treatment given to those of the majority? It can be said that when people speak of censorship, they argue that such offensive speech is harmful to the oppressed, or the minority. But by definition, the oppressed minority have little to no political power. The powerful majority who have the power to make restrictions on speech will do so in a way that oppresses the minority’s freedom of speech. The purpose of free speech is to protect the minority, often unpopular, viewpoint from being overpowered by the majority, or by the government. In New York Times v. Sullivan 1964, the idea of libel was creating. Libel states that if you are a public figure, you can only collect damages from someone if you have a very convincing and indisputable argument that (a.) the intention was to hurt, and (b.) statements were made with reckless regard for the truth. In contrast, if you are a private person, you must only prove that the published statements were false and easily verifiable to collect damages. This could be seen as favoring the majority (private persons being protected) over the minority (public figures not being protected). (New York Times v. Sullivan

Imagine this scenario: it’s a Saturday Night and I want to throw a party because my parents aren’t home. However, I’m scared to invite people over because I don’t want the neighbors complaining about the noise. Do noise ordinances violate the First Amendment?

The freedom of press sounds like one of the things we shouldn’t be focused on, especially with everything else that is going on in our world. Why exactly is this an important freedom? I have always found it to be a little bit strange that we are protecting the right to say hateful things about people you barely know. It doesn’t sound like it should be as important as things like torture or murder. Sometimes words can hurt, but they can also be used to do great things.

The government can not censor the press, even if what is published is against the government. The free press helps to protect citizens’ rights and hold the government in check. Also in accordance to the First Amendment, people have the right to join any organization of their choosing and come together as a group, peaceably. The last right that the public has is the right to present the government with petitions or letters that tell of their unhappiness and complaints against the government. This is a right that our founding fathers did not have back in England. When they declared independence from the King, they laid out all of their grievances for the world to see. In contrast, our citizens today do no have to wait for a historical event to vent their frustrations.

The First Amendment one that is watered down, serves as example of the freedom we as Americans have. It is best known as the amendment that lets us say what we want when we want. There is more to it that gets overlooked. It blocks government from establishing a theocracy, grants the people the right to peacefully assemble and protest the government for a redress of grievances. Our press is independent and is given freedom to publish at will. Our freedoms embolden us to speak out and organize for progress and against society's wrongs. Sometimes groups will organize to speak out but will sink to extreme measures as a means of expression. The first amendment has seen challenges in recent months. “Donald Trump referred to the press, and I'm quoting his exact words, as "dishonest, disgusting, and scum."Just ten days ago, you might have heard in a press conference, President Donald Trump said that the "press is out of control."(Chemerinsky, 553). To clashes between different ideologies on college campuses with some initiating riots. The first amendment grants many freedoms, however it does not grant protection from consequence.

Back in the year of 1791, when our grand country was at the tender age of fifteen, two gentlemen gathered together to form a written document that would protect their newly attained freedom. These written principles, later know as the Bill of Rights, were penned primarily by George Mason and James Madison. The Founding Fathers of the American public’s home country. It is interesting to note that not only were these two men the authors of Bill of Rights but were also successful in their own careers too. George Mason, a prospering planter in the state of Virginia and James Madison a graduate of the College of New Jersey, known as present day Princeton. Madison was a lawyer by trade, but was driven with a profound interest in ministry. They came together to compose one of the greatest treasures in the nation’s history: the Bill of Rights. In this written expository, this author will be discussing the first of the ten of these amendments: the amendment that guarantees Americans the freedom of Speech. The necessity of free speech and the important values it contains is a main foundation for this country, therefore, Rosenblatt 's argument for the freedom of “expression” is valid because it certifies our right to speak freely, form an opinion, and exercise the correct function of democracy while on American soil.

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution: an amendment that guarantees three rights, one of which is the right to freedom of expression. Under this, there resides the freedom of press. It assures that people are free to communicate through the means of media and dissemination without governmental restraints. However, if the government desires to interfere in one’s expression, the government can do so, but only with proper justification. In such cases, a court case is necessary (“First Amendment”). One such case is New York Times Co. v. United States. In favor of the publications made by the Times that had caused concern for the U.S. government, the final verdict was right in heeding the First Amendment, for the

In the address, Jefferson has grievances about the press and speaks on length about it. The press’s difference of opinions about Jefferson makes him irritated, yet he understand their

An important provision of the Bill of Rights is the protection of freedom to publish, as provided by the First Amendment. This protection applies to all kinds of publications, even those that print unpopular opinions. In most censorship cases, every attempt is made to suppress the written word after publication, not before. Minnesota passed a law in 1925 that sought to prevent newspapers, magazines, and other publications from printing obscene, malicious, scandalous and defamatory material. This law was called the Minnesota Gag Law . This law allowed private citizens and/or public prosecutors to request a court injunction to shut down any publication that was known as a public nuisance. Publishers of newspapers had to show that they had good motives for anything they were going to print before they printed it.

In the past, there has always been conflict between the free press and the government. This conflict was very evident in the Pentagon Papers case, also known as New York Times Co. v. United States. Historically, the Supreme Court has disagreed on the limitations that can be placed on the First Amendment. The Supreme Court faced these issues in the case of The New York Times. The newspaper obtained a copy of a Defense Department report that explained government deception in the Vietnam War. The Pentagon Papers emerged when the American people disagreed on the United States involvement in the war. Under the First Amendment, The New York Times argued

In the book Freedom for the Thought that we Hate, author Anthony Lewis takes a simply phrased law, the First Amendment and shows how complex freedom of speech really is once put into the real world of freedom, as we know it. He shows through his rejections of absolutism, strong support towards freedom restriction, and objective analysis of Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, that the United States press is unlike any other in the world.

In the United States, freedom of the press and the broader freedom of speech are protected by the First

As always, there are those individuals that oppose the power to censor. There are members of society that believe in the freedom to speak publicly and to publish. This is a basic belief in the freedom of expression and is to be protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. On the eve of the bicentennial of the Bill of Rights, the first wave of a nationwide survey, comprising more than 1500 citizens was conducted. Through this survey it was found that American rate free speech as their second most precious First Amendment right and regard a free press highly in the abstract. Although there are strong cases made for and against censorship, the rising trend calling for censorship can threaten our basic rights to free expression and the right to be informed. At the center of the debate is the First Amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees our right to read, speak, write, and communicate freely. The government at the state or federal level cannot