Imminent Lawless Action and Free Speech

Very Hard Unit 3: Civil Liberties & Rights Freedom Of Speech

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution is often cited in discussions about the limitations and protections of free speech. The interpretation of what constitutes protected speech has evolved through various Supreme Court cases. Consider the case of Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), which involved a Ku Klux Klan leader who was convicted under an Ohio law for advocating illegal activities. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the leader, establishing the 'imminent lawless action' test.

Based on the implications of this ruling, which of the following statements accurately reflects the current understanding of the limits of free speech?

Speech intended to incite violence may be restricted if it presents a clear and present danger.

Speech is protected unless it is likely to produce imminent lawless action.

All forms of speech, including hate speech, are protected under the First Amendment.

The government can regulate speech based on its content if it is offensive to some groups.

Hint

Submitted9.9K

Correct7.1K

% Correct72%