In the United States, the First Amendment protects freedom of speech, but that protection is not absolute. Over time, the Supreme Court has recognized several constitutional limits—categories of speech or circumstances where the government may restrict expression without violating the Constitution.
Here are the main limits:
1. Incitement to Imminent Lawless Action
Speech intended and likely to provoke imminent unlawful acts (e.g., riots, violence) is not protected.
Key case: Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) – advocacy of violence is protected unless it is directed to inciting imminent lawless action and is likely to produce it.
2. True Threats and Intimidation
Speech that communicates a serious intent to commit violence against individuals or groups is not protected.
Virginia v. Black (2003) clarified that true threats fall outside First Amendment protection.
3. Fighting Words
Direct, face-to-face insults that are likely to provoke immediate violence from the listener may be restricted.
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942) established this category, though courts apply it narrowly today.
4. Obscenity
Obscene material is unprotected if it meets the Miller test (Miller v. California, 1973):
Appeals to prurient interest (based on community standards),
Depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way,
Lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
5. Child Pornography
Always unprotected, even if not obscene under Miller.
New York v. Ferber (1982) – government has a compelling interest in protecting children from exploitation.
6. Defamation (Libel and Slander)
False statements of fact that harm another’s reputation can be punished, but standards differ:
Public officials/figures: must show "actual malice" (knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard).
New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)
Private individuals: lower standard, usually negligence.
7. Commercial Speech
Protected, but less strongly than political speech.
Government can regulate false, misleading, or harmful advertising.
Central Hudson Gas & Electric v. Public Service Commission (1980) provides the current test.
8. National Security and Classified Information
The government can restrict disclosure of sensitive military or national security secrets in some cases.
Near v. Minnesota (1931) and New York Times v. United States (1971) show that prior restraint is almost always unconstitutional—but not absolutely.
9. Time, Place, and Manner Restrictions
Even protected speech may be regulated content-neutrally for order and safety.
Restrictions must be:
- Content-neutral,
- Narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest,
- Leave open alternative channels of communication.
Example: permit requirements for parades, noise limits at night.
In short: The First Amendment protects speech broadly, but when speech directly threatens safety, order, or others’ rights, it can be limited.
For a look at the variety of questison I asked, click here.