Download - Conduct and speech
![Page 1: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
![Page 2: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
3 Kinds of Conduct
• No communicative value
• Purely Communicative
• Both communicative and non-communicative
![Page 3: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Court Tests
1) Is the conduct expressive?(Intent and likelihood)
![Page 4: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Court Tests
1) Is the conduct expressive?(Intent and likelihood)
• If no, government may regulate• If yes, we ask the next question . . .
![Page 5: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Court Tests
1) Is the conduct expressive?(Intent and likelihood)
• If no, government may regulate• If yes, we ask the next question . . .
2) Is the expressive conduct protected?
![Page 6: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Is the Expressive Conduct Protected?
• United States v. O’Brien (1968)
• Texas v. Johnson (1989)
![Page 7: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Is the Expressive Conduct Protected?
• To determine answer, we look at government’s intent– If the regulation is aimed at the expressive content
itself, we apply strict scrutiny
– If the regulation is not aimed at the expressive conduct, we apply intermediate scrutiny (“The O’Brien Test”)
![Page 8: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
The O’Brien Test
• Is the regulation within Constitutional power of the government?
• Does the regulation further an important or substantial government interest?
• Is the government interest unrelated to the suppression of free expression?
• Is the incidental restriction of expression no greater than essential?
![Page 9: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Flag Burning
![Page 10: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Nude Dancing
![Page 11: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Hate Speech
• Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)
• RAV v. St. Paul (1992)
![Page 12: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
“Intimidating Speech”
• Virginia v. Black (2003)
![Page 13: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Picketing
![Page 14: Conduct and speech](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081400/5559e4fdd8b42a34498b4e0a/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Picketing
“Simply put, the church members had the right to be where they were.” --Chief Justice John Roberts