3 ms·

> Just go google supreme court, 1st amendment cases, and reach the actual primary sources. Such as the case that gave rose to the "shouting fire in a crowded t

by shkkmo 5y ago

> Just go google supreme court, 1st amendment cases, and reach the actual primary sources. Such as the case that gave rose to the "shouting fire in a crowded theater" idiom The reason why it takes a lifetime of study to understand what sorts of speech are actually protected is because the Supreme Court has had some very inconsitent decisions (such as the one I mention above) that require tortured reasoning to align with the first amendment and other case law. Id there are indeed some clear criteria, you should be able provide a reasonable summary of them; it should not require a lifetime of study. If the average american can't be said to understand what their free speech rights are...can you really say that they have thoae rights in prqctice?

stale2002 5y ago
> can you really say that they have those rights in practice? Yes, because the court system has traditionally been extremely strict, most of the time, in defending free speech, compared to other countries. So yes, I can confidently say that the court system has defended free speech in the US, much more than in other countries, most of the time. > If the average american can't be said to understand Courts protecting a right that someone doesn't understand is still better than the courts not protecting it. Sometimes our rights only matter to us when we really need them, and it is still better that they are protected in those cases.
- shkkmo 5y ago
  So the court only strictly protects those rights "most of the time" and that creates a complex legal situation that requires a lifetime of study...how then can the average citizen know what they are allowed to say and trust that when they actually really need those protections that they won't end up as one of the other times where the court values government control over freedom of speech. We'll see if the Supreme Court has anything to say when the US finally get Assange extradited and puts him on trial for his speech. I don't have a lot of confidence he'll get any protections.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

by shkkmo 5y ago

stale2002 5y ago

> can you really say that they have those rights in practice? Yes, because the court system has traditionally been extremely strict, most of the time, in defending free speech, compared to other countries. So yes, I can confidently say that the court system has defended free speech in the US, much more than in other countries, most of the time. > If the average american can't be said to understand Courts protecting a right that someone doesn't understand is still better than the courts not protecting it. Sometimes our rights only matter to us when we really need them, and it is still better that they are protected in those cases.

shkkmo 5y ago
So the court only strictly protects those rights "most of the time" and that creates a complex legal situation that requires a lifetime of study...how then can the average citizen know what they are allowed to say and trust that when they actually really need those protections that they won't end up as one of the other times where the court values government control over freedom of speech. We'll see if the Supreme Court has anything to say when the US finally get Assange extradited and puts him on trial for his speech. I don't have a lot of confidence he'll get any protections.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]