Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Post of the Week!
Search Politics
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Post of the Week!
Search Politics


Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (12) |
Author: albaby1 🐝🐝 HONORARY
SHREWD
  😊 😞

Number: of 41628 
Subject: Re: Schools Evacuations in Springfield
Date: 09/16/2024 6:07 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 6
Probably more a question for albaby, but if speech results in threats/acts of violence, is it still protected? I'm sure at least some it. But where is the line?

The line, according to the SCOTUS decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio, is that speech is protected under the First Amendment and cannot be criminalized unless it is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action".

So with respect to speech that "results in" threats or acts of violence, mere causation is not enough. The speech has to have been "directed to" producing those threats or acts of violence, and the speech has to have been "likely to" cause those threats or acts of violence.

This is a high bar. It is exceptionally unlikely that anything JD Vance has been saying would meet it.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (12) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds