Debate

Time, Place, and Manner Restrictions

Even speech that enjoys the most extensive First Amendment protection may be subject to

“regulations of the time, place, and manner of expression which are content-neutral, are narrowly

tailored to serve a significant government interest, and leave open ample alternative channels of

communication.”112 In the case in which this language appears, the Supreme Court allowed a city

ordinance that banned picketing “before or about” any residence to be enforced to prevent

picketing outside the residence of a doctor who performed abortions, even though the picketing

occurred on a public street. The Court noted that “[t]he First Amendment permits the government

to prohibit offensive speech as intrusive when the ‘captive’ audience cannot avoid the

objectionable speech.”113

The Court has also decided that the First Amendment provides less than full protection to

commercial speech, defamation (libel and slander), speech that may be harmful to children,

speech broadcast on radio and television, and public employees’ speech. Even speech that enjoys

the most extensive First Amendment protection may be subject to “regulations of the time, place,

and manner of expression which are content-neutral, are narrowly tailored to serve a significant

government interest, and leave open ample alternative channels of communication.” Furthermore,

even speech that enjoys the most extensive First Amendment protection may be restricted on the

basis of its content if the restriction passes “strict scrutiny” (i.e., if the government shows that the

restriction serves “to promote a compelling interest” and is “the least restrictive means to further

the articulated interest”).

References

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/95-815.pdf (above article)

http://wtcmuslimcenter.procon.org/ (pro/cons)

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/03/police-probe-threats-against-new-york-islamic-center-backers/ (Threats against the Imam and his wife)...