Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Caseslimitations
Caseslimitations
Caseslimitations
4. About 30 anti-abortion
hinted that Diaz had an affair with protesters march in a circle on a
Shane Nickerson, a friend. When
sidewalk in front of a clinic where
the article was published, she and abortions are performed, chanting
Nickerson were in relationships
slogans and carrying signs. As
and the hardly recognizable image women attempt to enter the clinic,
posted with the article caused
the protesters try to block the
damage to both relationships
entrance and verbally harass the
women, trying to persuade them
not to have an abortion.
5.
Incitement: The courts decided that they could not punish mere advocacy.
That means that they cannot limit speech that advocates, supports or
describes a particular viewpoint. EVEN if that viewpoint is violent. They can
only limit speech that expresses an immediate or imminent call to violence.
In other words, they can limit speech that incites violence.
Fighting words: In Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942), the Supreme
Court held that speech is unprotected if it constitutes "fighting words".
Fighting words, as defined by the Court, is speech that "tend[s] to incite an
immediate breach of the peace" by provoking a fight, so long as it is a
"personally abusive [word] which, when addressed to the ordinary citizen,
is, as a matter of common knowledge, inherently likely to provoke a violent
reaction". Additionally, such speech must be "directed to the person of the
hearer" and is "thus likely to be seen as a 'direct personal insult'". Along
with fighting words, speech might be unprotected if it either intentionally,
knowingly, or recklessly inflicts severe emotional distress.
Miller test: Under the Miller test (which takes its name from Miller v.
California [1973]), speech is unprotected if (1) "the average person,
applying contemporary community standards, would find that the [subject
or work in question], taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest" and
(2) "depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, contemporary
community standards, sexual conduct defined by the applicable state law"
and (3) "the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political,
or scientific value".
than the person defamed. Some common law jurisdictions also distinguish
between spoken defamation, called slander, and defamation in other
media such as printed words or images, called libel.
False light laws protect against statements which are not technically false
but misleading.
In some civil law jurisdictions, defamation is treated as a crime rather than
a civil wrong. The United Nations Commission on Human Rights ruled in
2012 that the criminalization of libel violates freedom of expression and is
inconsistent with Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights.
A person who defames another may be called a "defamer", "famacide",
"libeler" or "slanderer".