by John Bandler
Here's the First Amendment (I added the line breaks to separate each phrase).
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
or abridging the freedom of speech,
or of the press;
or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,
and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Let's outline a way to categorize speech, starting with the biggest category (everything) and then smaller and smaller subsets of that.
I think my diagrams help categorize different types of speech, and what consequences might result from that speech.
Here we show the five main categories, but they are not to scale, they are big enough so you can see the color scheme, the labels, and a little bit of description.
The categories are:
Now we are highlighting "protected speech" with this diagram.
Of course, this is a bit of a simplification.
Note that certain speech might be "protected" from any criminal prosecution, but fair game for a civil litigation.
Remember the key point which is protection from government interference.
Just because speech is protected from government interference does not mean the speech can be made without any type of consequences at all. People might protest, boycott, and etc.
We can debate "cancel culture", but if we are talking about the First Amendment, we need to remember the First Amendment is about what government can do, not about what "society" and individuals can or should do.
This diagram is a little bit closer to scale.
The main takeaway here is the vast majority of speech is protected by the First Amendment. A small sliver could be subject to valid civil claims, and a really tiny piece could be criminally punished.
[This section is a work in progress]
Court decisions and the law need a process for deciding whether statements are criminally actionable or civilly actionable. And for deciding whether a government action regarding speech is lawful or violates the First Amendment.
So here are some principles.
[This section is a work in progress]
An evolution of law and interpretation.
First Amendment ratified in 1791
Interesting concepts and cases that touch upon the First Amendment
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). The U.S. Supreme Court provides greater protection for speech about public officials and public figures, requiring a defamation case to show "actual malice". Actual malice meaning the person knew what they said was false, or said it with a reckless disregard for whether it was false.
There is a lot of speech out there, and a lot of it contains false information, conspiracy theories, hateful speech, criminal speech, and more. Whether for profit, political gain, nation-state advantage or simple ignorance, there is lots of propaganda, misinformation, and disinformation.
Let's hope enough people will seek, rely upon, and act upon reliable information, facts, logic, and reason.
These are short Q&As and summaries cannot be expected to capture all nuances of all terms or decisions.
This page is a study aid for my students, and a place for me to draw quiz and assignment questions from. The goal is for students to learn important concepts, especially foundational concepts that provide footholds for learning more complex concepts.
This page is hosted at https://johnbandler.com/things-to-know-first-amendment, copyright John Bandler, all rights reserved.
Posted 11/28/2023 based on years of teaching. Updated 11/28/2023