Price and Kaplan discuss Trump’s argument that his false statements on the elections were allowed, according to the First Amendment of the Constitution.  The Supreme Court has a history of taking a decidedly different view.

Here are some notable US Supreme Court decisions that have established limits to the First Amendment’s protection of free speech:

• Schenck v. United States (1919): The Court ruled that certain forms of speech, such as speech that presents a “clear and present danger” to public safety, can be restricted. This case introduced the concept that speech may be restricted if it poses a danger to society.

• Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969): The Court refined the “clear and present danger” standard, establishing the “imminent lawless action” test. Speech can only be restricted if it is likely to incite immediate unlawful action.

• Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942): The Court held that “fighting words” — speech that is likely to provoke violence or a breach of the peace — is not protected by the First Amendment.

• Miller v. California (1973): The Court established the Miller test for obscenity, which allows the government to regulate and restrict obscene material that lacks serious artistic, literary, political, or scientific value.

• Virginia v. Black (2003): The Court ruled that cross burning with the intent to intimidate is not protected speech under the First Amendment. It upheld the constitutionality of laws that criminalize certain forms of cross burning.

• Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988): The Court ruled that public school officials have the authority to regulate the content of student newspapers, as long as their actions are reasonably related to legitimate educational concerns.

• Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969): While the Court ruled in favor of students’ right to express their political views in schools through symbolic speech (wearing armbands in this case), it also acknowledged that such rights can be limited if the speech disrupts the educational environment.

• New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964): The Court established the “actual malice” standard for defamation claims against public officials, making it harder for public figures to successfully sue for libel. This ruling provides greater protection for criticism of public figures.

• Citizens United v. FEC (2010): The Court ruled that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited under the First Amendment, equating corporate spending on political speech with individual free speech.

• R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992): The Court ruled that a local hate speech ordinance was unconstitutional because it selectively targeted certain types of expressive conduct based on content. This decision highlighted the principle that speech regulations cannot discriminate based on viewpoint.

These cases illustrate how the Supreme Court has recognized certain limitations on the First Amendment’s protection of free speech in various contexts. Keep in mind that the interpretation of these cases and their implications can be complex and subject to ongoing legal debate for years to come.

The Price of Business is one of the longest running shows of its kind in the country and is in markets coast to coast. The Host, Kevin Price, is a multi-award winning author, broadcast journalist, and syndicated columnist. Learn more about the show and its digital partners at www.PriceofBusiness.com (scroll down to the bottom of the page).

Check out more national news stories here.