Imingcele Yokukhuluma Ngenkululeko: Ukuhlola Imingcele Yomthetho - sisekelo

Lesi sihloko sinikeza ukuhlolwa okucubungulayo kwemingcele engokomthetho ekhuluma ngenkululeko yokukhuluma e - United States, ukuhlola intuthuko engokomlando, izigaba eziyinhloko zenkulumo engavikelekile, indima yezinkantolo, nezinselele eziphuthumayo eziphakamayo enkathini yokuxhumana kwamanani.

Isisekelo Esingokomlando Semingcele Yokukhuluma

Ukuqondwa kwanamuhla kwemingcele yokukhuluma akuzange kumiswe ngobusuku obubodwa. Umthetho wakuqala waseMelika, othonywe umthetho ovamile waseNgilandi, wavumela ukumangalelwa okukhulu ngenxa yokuvukela umbuso ngokwawo. ISinyathelo sokwenqabela sango 1798, ngokwesibonelo, ukwenziwa kwemithetho ephambanayo “inkohliso, ehlazisayo, nenonya” izinkulumo ezimelene nohulumeni, ukuphikisana okuqondile nombhalo weSichibiyelo Sokuqala. Nakuba loMthetho waphela, wabeka isigaba sempikiswano eqhubekayo mayelana nokuthi isivikelo sokukhuluma sifinyelelaphi.

Izenzakalo Eziyinhloko Zasekuqaleni Kwekhulu Lamashumi Amabili

Ukuguqukela Ezindinganisweni Zokukhuthazana

The “clear and present danger” test proved difficult to apply consistently. For decades, courts sometimes allowed restrictions on speech that merely advocated for unlawful acts, without requiring an imminent threat. The turning point came with Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969). Clarence Brandenburg, a Ku Klux Klan leader, had made a speech at a rally that included racist remarks and vague threats. The Court overturned his conviction, establishing the modern incitement test: speech can be punished only if it is “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action” and is “likely to incite or produce such action.” This high bar protects virtually all abstract advocacy of violence or illegal conduct, no matter how repugnant, unless it crosses the line into active, immediate provocation.

Izingxenye Zenkulumo Engavikelwanga: Ukuwohloka Okuphelele

INkantolo Ephakeme iye yaqaphela ukuthi izigaba ezithile zenkulumo ziwubala “ezingabalulekile kakhulu emphakathini njengenyathelo eliqondene neqiniso” kangangokuthi azitholi sivikelo seSichibiyelo Sokuqala. Lezi zigaba zichazwa ngokucacile okukhulu, futhi iNkantolo iye yaxwayisa ngokuphindaphindiwe ngokumelene nokwenza okuhlukile okusha. Izigaba eziyinhloko ezingavikelekile zihlanganisa ukungcoliswa kwegama, ukuhlanjalazwa, ukubhebhethekiswa, amagama okulwa, kanye nokusongela kweqiniso, kanye nezinye ezimbalwa ezifana nokukhohlisa nokukhohlisa.

Ububi

Ukuzimela kungenye yezindawo eziphikisana kakhulu zomthetho wenkululeko yokukhuluma. Ukuhlolwa kwanamuhla kuvela ku . Miller v. California[ (1973]), okusungula indinganiso yesithathu:

1. Kungakhathaliseki ukuthi umuntu ovamile, osebenzisa izindinganiso zomphakathi wanamuhla, uyothola umsebenzi, uthathwa uwonke, ukhanga isithakazelo esingokwezinga elibi (okungukuthi, isithakazelo esihlazisayo noma esenyanyekayo ngobulili).
2. Kungakhathaliseki ukuthi lo msebenzi ubonisa noma uchaza, ngendlela ecasulayo, ukuziphatha kobulili okuchazwa ngokuqondile ngomthetho wezwe osebenzayo.
3. Kungakhathaliseki ukuthi umsebenzi, othathwe uwonke, awunalo inani elingathi sína lombhalo, lobuciko, lobupolitiki, noma lwezesayensi (i-SLAPS ukuhlolwa).

Kubalulekile ukuthi iprong yesithathu isebenzisa i- indinganiso enengqondo kunezindinganiso zomphakathi, iqinisekisa ukuthi ukusebenza ngenzuzo yangempela kuyavikelwa ngisho noma kucasula imizwa yendawo. Izinto ezihlulekayo zonke ezintathu zingavinjelwa. Nokho, iNkantolo iye yavikela ngokuqhubekayo ukuba nezinto ezingcolile ekhaya (] SSley v. Georgia, 1969), kuyilapho ivumela ukuvinjelwa kokusakazwa nokubukiswa komphakathi.

Ukulahlwa kwecala .[FLT:][FLT]. [1964] [iSichibiyelo sokuqala] sibeka imingcele ebalulekile emthetho wokuhlambalaza ukuze kuvinjelwe ukuqashelwa komphakathi. [[FLT]][[FLT]][12][4][Umthetho] [[FLT] [194]] [194]] [ulwazi] ukuthi kwakungamanga noma ukunganaki iqiniso]. Lokhu kwanyuselwa kungathi kamuva [FLT] [FFFF:] [5] kungenakuziveza ukuthi intengokwa.[FLT]