Journal of Free Speech Law: "'Falsely Shouting Fire,'" by Profs. Genevieve Lakier & Evelyn Douek
journalspeech.substack.com
The article is here; the Introduction: Over one hundred years ago, in Schenck v. United States, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes created a meme. Holmes wanted to illustrate why freedom of speech was not—and could never be—absolute. "The most stringent protection of free speech," Holmes wrote, "would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic." This was because, Holmes explained, "[t]he question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent." A false cry of fire in a theater, he implied, surely posed this kind of clear and present danger.
Journal of Free Speech Law: "'Falsely Shouting Fire,'" by Profs. Genevieve Lakier & Evelyn Douek
Journal of Free Speech Law: "'Falsely…
Journal of Free Speech Law: "'Falsely Shouting Fire,'" by Profs. Genevieve Lakier & Evelyn Douek
The article is here; the Introduction: Over one hundred years ago, in Schenck v. United States, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes created a meme. Holmes wanted to illustrate why freedom of speech was not—and could never be—absolute. "The most stringent protection of free speech," Holmes wrote, "would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic." This was because, Holmes explained, "[t]he question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent." A false cry of fire in a theater, he implied, surely posed this kind of clear and present danger.