Timeline for Why is the US ranked as #45 in Press Freedom ratings, despite its extremely permissive free speech laws?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 1, 2019 at 6:49 | history | edited | AnoE | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 22 characters in body
|
| Mar 31, 2019 at 1:02 | comment | added | Obie 2.0 | @Mazura - That is certainly not true. The amendment applied to the entire federal government from the outset, nominally. The incorporation doctrine further extended it to state and local governments. It's definitely not "just Congress." A brief survey of major free speech cases is enough to show that. E.g. National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (neo-Nazis couldn't be prohibited from marching by city) or Hazelwood School District et al. v. Kuhlmeier et al. (public school could restrict student newspaper, but needed pedagogical justification). | |
| Mar 30, 2019 at 21:26 | comment | added | President James K. Polk | @Mazura: You are incorrect. The first amendment covers all branches of government including the executive branch. Executive orders are reviewable by the courts and must not violate the constitution. | |
| Mar 30, 2019 at 2:02 | comment | added | Mazura | OP seems to be under the impression of that amendment giving US citizens carte blanche to say anything, which couldn't be further from the truth. All it does is prevent Congress from passing laws as such. But if you have things like executive orders it all goes out the window; USA: minus one. | |
| Mar 29, 2019 at 17:27 | comment | added | hszmv | + Though private events have a little close. Typically security are allowed to remove you against your will and are trained in lawful ways to deal with the problem and of course, if you're injured because you were being difficult it's not legally their fault. This also has to be highly disruptive... you're free to listen to a lecture and disagree and voice your disagreement during appropriate question periods. | |
| Mar 29, 2019 at 17:21 | comment | added | hszmv | + * In so far as they don't meet legal harassment or impeding their duties. Officers can also arrest you if you fail to comply with lawful orders. It also doesn't stop cops from employing use of their morbid sense of humor, nor does it mean that the cops will be nice about further dealings with you. *Actually, almost every public protest has a component counter-protest in the United States, and they frequently get close enough that insults ruckuses are started. As long as they do not devolve into lawless actions, it's perfectly legal. + | |
| Mar 29, 2019 at 17:14 | comment | added | hszmv | Some quick corrections to your examples: * Depends on the states. States that are "Right to Work" allow the boss to fire you for any reason, whether you are bad at your job or he doesn't like your face. States that don't have this do have protections in place and the boss can be sued. * Depends on how famous you are before the lies are spread. There's a current case making it's way through the courts will probably define the line better. + | |
| Mar 29, 2019 at 16:20 | comment | added | AnoE | @Obie, please check my revisions. Does that make more sense now, or is the answer too "all over the place", still? | |
| Mar 29, 2019 at 16:20 | history | edited | AnoE | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 313 characters in body
|
| Mar 29, 2019 at 14:18 | comment | added | AnoE | Thanks for the comments, @Obie. I'll try to make my train of thought more clear later (basically I want to say "Freedom of Speech does not mean that everybody can say anything all the time" ;) ). | |
| Mar 29, 2019 at 9:53 | comment | added | Obie 2.0 | Further, how does this address the press freedom index issue? Only the last part seems to mention it and it's not very clear to me how it all ties in. | |
| Mar 29, 2019 at 9:51 | comment | added | Obie 2.0 | I think you've misunderstood how it works. The government doesn't have to be either the target of the speech or a party thereof. They can't restrict what people say regardless. Example: the government can't pass a law saying that no one can insult Wal-Mart. Also, slander and libel lawsuits are extremely difficult to win, especially against individuals. Finally, in some jurisdictions there are protections against being fired without cause. | |
| Mar 29, 2019 at 9:43 | history | answered | AnoE | CC BY-SA 4.0 |