ipl-logo

Annotated Bibliography On Overcriminalizing Speech

1204 Words5 Pages

Christopher McCall Laura Retersdorf English 1102 10/12/16 Annotated Bibliography Buchhandler-Raphael, Michal. "Overcriminalizing Speech." Cardozo Law Review 36.5 (2015): 1667-1737. Academic Search Complete. Web. 26 Sept. 2016. This source highlights the absence of the first amendment in many speech related crimes, such as conspiracy and verbal harassment. The article discusses how these are not crimes that are being committed, rather, these are crimes that are only being discussed. This raises the question of whether or not the United States is overcriminilizing speech. The article argues that in order for these crimes to seriously be considered as a criminal offense, the government needs to create an objective way of qualifying what is and …show more content…

The article argues that the courts should only view harmful speech in the same eyes and rule them the same as if they were conduct harms. The source then discusses how many scholars believe that freedom of speech only applies when the benefits outweigh the harms, regarding what is being said. The article does a good job of approaching the problem through a semi-neutral lens. The article clearly lets its opinion be known at times; however, it approaches the opposite side of the argument in a fair manner. The article will be incredibly beneficial because it discusses when freedom of speech should not apply with a neutral approach. In my discussion of freedom of speech, I need to evaluate multiple points of view, which is exactly what this article …show more content…

"Intellectual Freedom And Freedom Of Speech: Three Theoretical Perspectives." Library Quarterly 86.2 (2016): 153-171. Professional Development Collection. Web. 17 Oct. 2016The source examines three different theories of Intellectual Freedom and Freedom of Speech. The article starts by defining intellectual freedom; it also establishes that American libraries are very efficient, and are a prime source for Americans to find information. It then furthers its purpose through establishing to the reader the link between Intellectual Freedom (IF) and Freedom of Speech. The source then gives a basic layout of its argument to the reader in the form of a chart. This helps the reader follow the author’s argument. The first theory that is discussed is the marketplace of ideas theory which states that ideas should be like products and compete with one another until eventually the dominant/best idea wins. The theory also discusses falsehoods and their place in the marketplace of ideas. The theory places falsehoods as a very important part of the marketplace, because falsehoods contribute to the integrity of the truths. The article then goes on to discuss the importance of Intellectual Freedom and Freedom of Speech in democracy. Oltmann states that Freedom of Speech is necessary to democracy because it allows the circulation of free thought and opinions that then lead to political involvement of Americans. The source then discusses the place that the library and IF

Show More
Related
481 Words | 2 Pages

Through his words, he expresses his opinion that we, as Americans, are not defending our rights to freedom of speech. In his opening sentence, he demonstrates that Americans do not value political freedom as a necessity, but rather a noble ideal. Throughout his entire work, he comes back to this idea and continues to support it with his words.

Read More
542 Words | 3 Pages

Freedom is an important aspect in society. Living in the twenty first century, freedom is taken for granted, however because its so easily attained, freedom has never been seen as something important. Walter Lippmann a famous writer during 1939, argues in his article The Indispensable Opposition the importance of freedom of opinion. Although it’s written in the twentieth century, his argument still applies today. With the use of different rhetorical strategies,like interruption, persuasive diction, and metaphors Walter Lippmann emphasizes his opinion of freedom in society.

Read More
707 Words | 3 Pages

A speech code is any university policy that forbids the use of hateful or contemptuous expressions towards any social group, particularly those categorized based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, religion, etc. In this essay, I will explain why such regulations are justifiable for the reasons that Charles R. Lawrence Ⅲ states in Racist Speech as the Functional Equivalent of Fighting Words. He argues that speech codes “[do] nothing more than prohibit intentional face-to-face insults”(pg 175), and that “racial insults are undeserving of First Amendment protection because the perpetrator’s intention is not to discover truth or initiate dialogue, but to injure the victim.”(pg 175) A prime reason for many universities

Read More
1634 Words | 7 Pages

Bill that restrict teachers abilities of free speech are directly contradictory of American values. The differences between selection v. censorship, and how modern day book bannings are not catorgized as selection. Certain landmark cases prove the governments ability to reconignizze censorship as a problem, but their reasons why they have yet to protect intelectinisum is questioned. Finally questions on the parallel between hateful incidents and ideologies were brought forth to show that there’s a possible connection between two closely related problems. All of this serves as a way to show that they’s a significant problem that can be quickly addressed, but is couintiusly ignored in favor of minorites extreme values.

Read More
1316 Words | 6 Pages

Academic arguments cannot exist without a level of shared understanding. The entire ecosystem of authors writing, responding, arguing and developing new ideas depends on the idea that writers can apply their own interpretation to a build upon the understanding of a different writer. In Stanley Fish’s There’s No Such Thing as Free Speech and It’s a Good Thing, Too, Stanley Fish attempts to present his own interpretation of free speech.

Read More
64 Words | 1 Pages

Free speech is the right to speak without censorship. Free speech should III. HIstory of Free speech and how it has brought about change? IV.

Read More
498 Words | 2 Pages

Justice Goldberg stated that the right to speak one’s mind should not depend upon an investigation by the jury to the motivation of the citizen or press. The theory of our Constitution is that every citizen may speak his mind on matters of public concern and may not be barred from speaking or publishing because those in control of government think that what is said or written is unfair, false, or

Read More
2530 Words | 11 Pages

In such instances Mill refers to the assumptive fact that allowing others to express their opinions can lead to truth. This is another idea that lie at the basis for this essay. In listing reasons for free speech,

Read More
1291 Words | 6 Pages

On its face, the first amendment free speech clause of the Constitution is straightforward and unqualified, providing that, “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” Despite this, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that various categories of speech fall wholly outside of first amendment protection and thus merit proper censorship in appropriate cases. Among such restricted categories of expression are: advocacy intended, and likely, to incite imminent lawless action; obscenity, child pornography, true threats, defamation, fraud, and finally “fighting words”. The fighting words doctrine is a curious aberration from typical Supreme Court jurisprudence in that the Court has never upheld a single conviction on the basis of fighting words since its seminal establishment in Chaplinksy v. New Hampshire.

Read More
289 Words | 2 Pages

In the article, “The Indispensable Opposition,” author, Walter Lippmann, argues his claim that we must view the freedom of oppositions as a way to improve our decisions in a democratic society rather than just tolerating that freedom of speech. When freedom of speech is tolerated and only seen as a right to speak, Lippmann believes that the liberty of opinion becomes a luxury. Moving forward, Lippmann then states that we must understand that the freedom of speech for our opponents are a vital necessity since it provides our own opinions to grow in improvement. Through practical experience, we realize we need the freedom of opposition and is no longer just our opponent ’s right.

Read More
719 Words | 3 Pages

However, there is an absence of clear evidence showing the the results of hate speech bans and connection between hate speech and harms such as discrimination, social exclusion, and violence in stable democracies. Also, these laws are ineffective and can be counter productive. It is not clear that these laws have done any good or prevented any harm. The benefits of punishment are not obvious. This uncertainty is not strong evidence to justify constraining a fundamental human right such as freedom of expression.

Read More
547 Words | 3 Pages

For humankind and society to advance, it is necessary for the people to have basic human rights. In the book, Fahrenheit 451, citizens in Phoenix are given little to no rights -- one of which are the rights of speech. Those who want to speak up in the city of Phoenix will be hunted down as criminals; compared to our modern society, freedom of speech is what shapes our community and society as a whole. Speech is what improves society, and let’s society thrive on the indifferences of the community. The community in Fahrenheit 451 is full of ignorance and oblivion.

Read More
923 Words | 4 Pages

Under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, freedom of speech is the bedrock of civil liberties. However, freedom of speech has been challenged before the Supreme Court over the years. In response, the Court has determined, under Constitutional authority, what types of speech are less protected and unprotected. Such speech as libel, slander and defamation are examples of unprotected and less protected speech under the First Amendment. The landmark cases of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, Snyder v. Phelps, Roth v. United States, and Miller v. California have changed the way the Court interprets the boundaries of freedom of speech.

Read More
1222 Words | 5 Pages

It is important to highlight that this analysis considers free speech as a process that has no absolute expression or form. In other world, speech will not be considered in its highest platonic form, but rather in in a more pragmatic and social way where the main purpose is communicating something valuable to

Read More
773 Words | 4 Pages

For example, when the motive of the speaker is simply malicious or spiteful, the offense speech canon be realistic in the eyes of law, or the reasonableness of the offensive speech here has less significance on the

Read More

More about Annotated Bibliography On Overcriminalizing Speech

Open Document