Fighting words refer to direct, face-to-face, personal insults that would likely lead the recipient to respond with violence. The U.S. Supreme Court developed the fighting-words doctrine in Chaplinsky v. New […]
Supreme Court Strikes Down Debt Exception Provision, Upholds General Ban on Robocalls
The case was brought by an association of political consultants who argued that a 2015 exception for calls to collect government debt violated the First Amendment. While the majority of justices agreed with the consultants that the 2015 exception was unconstitutional (6-3), an even greater majority disagreed with their argument for striking down the law in its entirety (7-2).
Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments In Case Involving Government Ban on Robocalls
The U.S. Supreme Court considers a challenge to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, a law passed in 1991 that prohibits the use of automated calls to cell phones. The plaintiffs, a group of political consultants, argue that the law and its exceptions discriminate based on the content of the caller's message.
Should Supreme Court Opinions Be Televised?
While most sitting Justices have opposed arguments in favor of televising Supreme Court oral arguments, little has been said about broadcasting the announcement of opinions. In their newest essay, First Amendment experts Floyd Abrams and Ronald Collins explore this possibility and the benefits it could offer the public.