3 ms·
> The case was later partially overturned by Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969, which limited the scope of banned speech to that which would be directed to and likely
by techrat 5y ago
> The case was later partially overturned by Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969, which limited the scope of banned speech to that which would be directed to and likely to incite imminent lawless action (e.g. a riot).
Relevant (to my example) portion still applies and was not overturned. May seem like a nitpick but I do think it's an important distinction to make.
- ravi-delia 5y agoIt's absolutely not a nitpick, but does that example still apply? I was under the impression that the 'clear and present' danger had been extremely narrowed to 'absolutely clear (as in an actual plan) and present (with explicit time)'. My recollection might not be right, but I could have sworn I remember the very justice that wrote the fire in the theater example rolling it back bit by bit over the course of the next several cases.