4 ms·
The restrictions on speech in the US are confined to “imminent lawless action”, per Brandenburg v Ohio. I think the commenter to whom you are replying might be
by bhupy 6y ago
The restrictions on speech in the US are confined to “imminent lawless action”, per Brandenburg v Ohio. I think the commenter to whom you are replying might be entirely fine with Reddit’s speech policy following that precedent.
And no, shouting “fire!” in a crowded theater is not illegal and is protected by the First Amendment.
- patmorgan23 6y agoBut you can't shout fire in crowed theater with the intent to cause chaos. You can shout fire in a crowded theater, if there is an actual fire.
- bhupy 6y agoYes you can! That argument was made in a SCOTUS argument that has since been unanimously overturned. https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time-to-stop-using-the-fire-in-a-crowded-theater-quote/264449/ https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-tim...
- simplify 6y agoGreat read, thanks for posting. I had mistakenly thought this for a while too.
- tripzilch 6y agoWow. So the argument was first successfully used to jail peaceful socialists and anti-war activists, but was later overturned for benefit of the KKK.
- bhupy 6y agoYup. Today, the law benefits peaceful socialists, anti-war activists, AND the KKK — which is a big win for free speech, in my books.