Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Freedom of speech is not, and never has been, absolute. The classic example is that one cannot falsely yell "FIRE!" in a crowded theater. There is such a thing as community standards of decency. The "F-bomb" signs should come down. The "Biden Sucks" signs, while in poor taste, are probably acceptable. The "Don't Blame Me" sign is absolutely protected speech.
It’s a municipal judge. They are hired by the town to uphold speeding tickets. He’s wrong and she will win on appeal.
No, his ruling is correct. At his low level he must apply the law as it stands. The borough has an anti-public profanity law. He had no choice but to rule against her. Now if Ms. Dick is challenging the constitutionality of that law, she has to appeal to a higher level. Don't know if she will succeed, the Supreme Court has never ruled that obscenity is protected under the 1st amendment.
Freedom of speech is not, and never has been, absolute. The classic example is that one cannot falsely yell "FIRE!" in a crowded theater. There is such a thing as community standards of decency. The "F-bomb" signs should come down. The "Biden Sucks" signs, while in poor taste, are probably acceptable. The "Don't Blame Me" sign is absolutely protected speech.
But you can flip the bird at a cop. It's a free speech right.
Freedom of speech is not, and never has been, absolute. The classic example is that one cannot falsely yell "FIRE!" in a crowded theater. There is such a thing as community standards of decency. The "F-bomb" signs should come down. The "Biden Sucks" signs, while in poor taste, are probably acceptable. The "Don't Blame Me" sign is absolutely protected speech.
Yes you CAN yell "Fire" in a crowded theater if it is in the script. Also, that anecdote has nothing to do with free speech. It has to do with commerce, not speech. In the old days competing theaters would send people into a rivals establishment to disrupt the performance and cause financial harm. The theaters at the time had non-existent fire suppression and were prone to fires. Cities passed local ordinances to stop the practice of sabotaging the performance.
No, his ruling is correct. At his low level he must apply the law as it stands. The borough has an anti-public profanity law. He had no choice but to rule against her. Now if Ms. Dick is challenging the constitutionality of that law, she has to appeal to a higher level. Don't know if she will succeed, the Supreme Court has never ruled that obscenity is protected under the 1st amendment.
You're wrong on so many levels. If this municipal judge doesn't reverse his own ruling, it will be throw out on the first appeal.
See the Supreme Court's 1971 ruling in Cohen V. California
You're wrong on so many levels. If this municipal judge doesn't reverse his own ruling, it will be throw out on the first appeal.
See the Supreme Court's 1971 ruling in Cohen V. California
Yep.
Quote:
Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court holding that the First Amendment prevented the conviction of Paul Robert Cohen for the crime of disturbing the peace by wearing a jacket displaying "F--- the Draft" in the public corridors of a California courthouse.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
