-
(单词翻译:双击或拖选)
Hello, and welcome to Legal Lad’s Quick and Dirty Tips for a More Lawful1 Life. I’m your host, Adam Freedman.
But first, your daily dose of legalese: This podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship with any listener. In other words, although I am a lawyer, I’m not your lawyer. In fact, we barely know each other. If you need personalized legal advice, contact an attorney in your community.
Today’s episode: Flipping2 the bird – free speech or not?
Tim has sent me an urgent email from … actually, Tim won’t tell me where he’s from, but here’s what he says:
“I was thinking of selling some T-shirts to express our feelings on a ruling by a certain city council. It’s all in fun but I sure don't wan’t to be sued!! Can you give me an idea of what I might expect?”
Attached to the email is a picture of the T-shirt in question – it says, “Hey, Exampletown City Council,” and below that, has a picture of a fist with the middle finger extended upward.
Now, I’m assuming that Exampletown is a pseudonym3 – like Anytown, USA – meant to protect Tim’s identity. But if it’s a real place can you let me know where that is? Is it close to Sampleville or maybe Paradigm4 City?
Tim, the quick answer is that messages on T-shirts are entitled to First Amendment5 protections. That means people generally cannot be arrested simply for wearing your T-shirts in public, unless the circumstances suggest that the shirt’s message constitutes “obscenity” or a provocation6 to violence.
The First Amendment to the Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law … abridging7 the freedom of speech.” This noble phrase raises the question of what constitutes “speech?”
Speech Need Not be Spoken
Over the years, courts have interpreted the word “speech” in the Constitution very broadly indeed. Speech encompasses8 not only spoken and written words, but also non-verbal behavior. The Supreme9 Court has even held that dancing is “speech” within the meaning of the First Amendment (intended, in the words of the Court, to convey a message of “eroticism”). But there are limits – courts have rejected arguments that smoking cigarettes, riding motorcycles, and wearing baggy10 trousers are protected by the First Amendment. And yes, all of those arguments were seriously made in federal court.
Extra Protection for “Political Speech”
The good news for Tim is that “political speech” usually gets a heightened level of protection under the First Amendment. In New York Times v Sullivan, the Supreme Court observed that protection of political speech – and in particular, the ability to criticize public officials – is at the core of the First Amendment. And political speech clearly includes non-verbal gestures. In the landmark11 case of Tinker v. Des Moines, the Supreme Court held that students had a First Amendment right to wear black armbands to protest the Vietnam War.
And so, assuming that Tim’s shirts reflect a genuine political message to the powers-that-be in, er, Exampletown, they would clearly be protected by the First Amendment. The major exceptions to this protection are obscenity and a doctrine12 known as “fighting words.”
The Obscenity Exception
The government does have greater latitude13 to suppress “obscene” speech, but what’s “obscene.” Personally, I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it. Under current Supreme Court precedent14, the word “obscene” refers to material that appeals to the prurient15 interest, depicts16 or describes sexual conduct in a way that is patently offensive, and lacks serious literary, artistic17, or scientific value.[1]
Political speech is usually not considered obscene. In Cohen v. California, another Vietnam era case, a young man named Paul Cohen was arrested for wearing inside a courthouse a jacket on which he had written “F- the draft” (except that he spelled out the entire F-word). In overturning Cohen’s conviction, the Supreme Court stated that “It cannot plausibly18 be maintained” that the words on his jacket convey any erotic message that would meet the definition of “obscenity.”
Them’s Fightin’ Words
Under the doctrine of “fighting words” a person may be arrested for a “breach of the peace” if his or her words are spoken directly to a person and are likely to provoke violent retaliation19. Whether the one-fingered salute20 can constitute “fighting words” has been the subject of various court cases. Unfortunately, the results haven’t been consistent. In 2000, a federal court in Arkansas held that flipping the bird to a police officer was protected speech and did not constitute “fighting words.”[2] However, on January 13, 2009, a federal court in Maine held that the First Amendment did not protect a man who was arrested for “disorderly conduct” for making the same gesture toward two game wardens21.[3]
Neither of these cases, however, involved a mere22 picture of an extended middle finger. Whether Tim’s T-shirts are sufficiently23 inflammatory to drive men to violence would depend upon the situation on the mean streets of Exampletown.
School for Scandal
The State may be able to impose limitations on expression in certain other limited contexts. Under the Tinker v. Des Moines case I mentioned a minute ago, school officials could prohibit, say, the wearing of a provocative24 T-shirt if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the shirt would “substantially and materially disrupt the educational process.”
Thank you for listening to Legal Lad’s Quick and Dirty Tips for a More Lawful Life.
You can send questions and comments to.........or call them in to the voicemail line at 206-202-4LAW. Please note that doing so will not create an attorney-client relationship and will be used for the purposes of this podcast only.
Finally, do you want to get Legal Lad and other great shows from Quick and Dirty Tips streamed to your iPhone? If so, download Stitcher free today at stitcher.com.
1 lawful | |
adj.法律许可的,守法的,合法的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 flipping | |
讨厌之极的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 pseudonym | |
n.假名,笔名 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 paradigm | |
n.例子,模范,词形变化表 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 amendment | |
n.改正,修正,改善,修正案 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 provocation | |
n.激怒,刺激,挑拨,挑衅的事物,激怒的原因 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 abridging | |
节略( abridge的现在分词 ); 减少; 缩短; 剥夺(某人的)权利(或特权等) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 encompasses | |
v.围绕( encompass的第三人称单数 );包围;包含;包括 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 supreme | |
adj.极度的,最重要的;至高的,最高的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 baggy | |
adj.膨胀如袋的,宽松下垂的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 landmark | |
n.陆标,划时代的事,地界标 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 doctrine | |
n.教义;主义;学说 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 latitude | |
n.纬度,行动或言论的自由(范围),(pl.)地区 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 precedent | |
n.先例,前例;惯例;adj.在前的,在先的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 prurient | |
adj.好色的,淫乱的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 depicts | |
描绘,描画( depict的第三人称单数 ); 描述 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
17 artistic | |
adj.艺术(家)的,美术(家)的;善于艺术创作的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
18 plausibly | |
似真地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
19 retaliation | |
n.报复,反击 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
20 salute | |
vi.行礼,致意,问候,放礼炮;vt.向…致意,迎接,赞扬;n.招呼,敬礼,礼炮 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
21 wardens | |
n.看守人( warden的名词复数 );管理员;监察员;监察官 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
22 mere | |
adj.纯粹的;仅仅,只不过 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
23 sufficiently | |
adv.足够地,充分地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
24 provocative | |
adj.挑衅的,煽动的,刺激的,挑逗的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|