Constitutional Law. Freedom of Speech. State Police Intelligence System Focusing on Public Protesters Declared Unconstitutional. Anderson v. Sills, 106 N. J. Super. 545, 256 A. 2d 298 (Ch. 1969), Appeal Docketed, No. A-150-69 (Super. Ct., App. Div. 1969)

1970 ◽  
Vol 83 (4) ◽  
pp. 935 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Intelligence System ◽  
State Police

THE POLITICS OF FREE SPEECH

2004 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 23-47
Author(s):  
Scott D. Gerber
Keyword(s):  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
The United States ◽  
Commercial Speech ◽  
Free Theory ◽  
Legal Theorist ◽  
The U.S

Freedom of speech long has been regarded as one of the “preferred freedoms” in the United States: one of the freedoms the U.S. Supreme Court deems “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.” However, what freedom of speech does—and should—mean is a highly charged question in American constitutional law. I will explore this question by examining how several prominent constitutional theorists have proposed particular approaches to free speech law in order to further their political objectives. I will examine the free speech theories of the nation's leading feminist legal theorist (regarding pornography), critical race theorists (regarding hate speech), libertarian (regarding commercial speech), and legal republican (regarding deliberative democracy). I also will discuss the principal criticisms of each of these theories, whether the courts have been influenced by any of them, and, in conclusion, whether it is possible to advance a nonpolitical (i.e., a purely law-based or value-free) theory of free speech.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document