Also known as: political speeches · political expression
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Expression advocating political positions, candidates, or public policy issues that receives the highest First Amendment protection against content-based regulation.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Phuong Pham stands on a public sidewalk outside a foreign consulate holding a sign condemning the foreign government's human rights record. Transit officers remove her under a rule barring only signs critical of foreign governments. The selective ban triggers strict scrutiny and fails because protecting diplomatic dignity supplies no compelling justification for silencing this category of political speech.
Philip Powell burns a U.S. flag on a public sidewalk during a demonstration against federal surveillance policies. Police arrest him under a statute prohibiting flag desecration except for proper disposal. The statute targets the communicative impact of the act as political expression and cannot stand absent an imminent breach of the peace or other compelling non-speech interest.
Piper Patel burns a cross on the lawn of a political opponent's home to protest the opponent's support for certain legislation. City police charge her under an ordinance that criminalizes only cross burning and similar symbols when they convey racial or political animus. The ordinance discriminates on the basis of the message conveyed and therefore violates the First Amendment even within the fighting-words category.
Penelope Price, a private citizen, spends personal funds on advertisements urging defeat of an incumbent senator. Federal law caps the amount she may spend independently of any candidate. The expenditure ceiling directly restrains core political speech and cannot be justified by the governmental interest in preventing corruption.
Pierce Patterson publishes an article accusing a political candidate of corruption without checking readily available public records. The candidate sues for defamation. Because the statements concern political matters, heightened First Amendment standards apply to this category of political speech.
Pulse Media, a corporation, runs television ads during an election season urging viewers to contact senators about a pending judicial nomination. Federal law bans the ads as electioneering communications. The prohibition suppresses core political speech by a corporate speaker and fails strict scrutiny because the ads are susceptible of reasonable interpretations other than as an appeal to vote for or against a candidate.
Content-based restrictions on political speech are subject to strict scrutiny and must be narrowly tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest. Regulations that single out signs critical of foreign governments or anonymous campaign literature have been invalidated under this standard.
Flag burning as a form of political expression is protected unless it creates an imminent breach of the peace or advances a compelling non-speech interest unrelated to suppressing the message. Statutes aimed at the communicative impact of flag desecration are unconstitutional.
…v. Alabama , 357 U.S. 449 (1958); Kusper v. Pontikes , 414 U.S. 51 (1973). Campaign contributions and expenditures constitute political expression. However, the Government may regulate such activity to prevent corruption and the appearance of corruption. 1. Contribution Limitations The $1,000 limitation on contributions to a…