Also known as: free speech · First Amendment speech
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The constitutional protection against governmental abridgment of expression. It prohibits Congress and the states from enacting laws that restrict speech on the basis of its content unless the restriction satisfies strict scrutiny or falls within a recognized category of unprotected speech.
Fatou Fall distributed leaflets criticizing a city ordinance outside the municipal building. City police arrested her under a newly enacted statute that banned all leafleting within 500 feet of government offices. The court held the statute invalid because it directly restricted protected expression without advancing a compelling interest unrelated to the message.
Farid Farahani offered to donate a statue criticizing local tax policy for placement in the city park. The parks department declined the gift and installed only monuments endorsing the city's fiscal policies. Because the permanent displays constituted government speech, the department's content-based selection did not violate Farahani's free speech rights.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Fatima Flores, a private-school teacher, was terminated after distributing materials to adult students. State funding and regulation alone were held insufficient to convert the school's employment decision into state action for constitutional purposes.
Francesca Fowler published an editorial accusing a police chief of corruption. The chief sued for libel. Because the statements concerned a public official's performance of duties, the plaintiff had to prove actual malice, preserving the newspaper's protected speech.
Fumiko Fujimoto wrote a magazine piece falsely implying that a local attorney had committed perjury in a civil case. The attorney sued for defamation. Because the plaintiff was a private figure, state law could impose liability for negligence without offending the First Amendment.
Francesca Fiore lived with her grandchildren in a single-family zone that limited occupancy to nuclear families. The city cited her for violating the ordinance. The restriction was evaluated under substantive due process standards governing family living arrangements.
Content-based restrictions trigger strict scrutiny and are presumptively invalid unless the government proves they are narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest.
Supporting sources
Permanent monuments in public parks constitute government speech even when privately donated, so their selection is not subject to free-speech scrutiny.
Supporting sources
A public-official plaintiff must prove actual malice to recover, ensuring that erroneous statements about official conduct receive breathing space.
States may impose liability for negligent falsehoods about private figures, but the First Amendment still requires proof of fault and limits presumed or punitive damages without actual malice.
Supporting sources
…in the Constitution. This liberty' is not a series of isolated points pricked out in terms of the taking of property; the freedom of speech, press, and religion; the right to keep and bear arms; the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures; and so on. It is a rational continuum which, broadly speaking, includes a freedom…