@ABAJournal: #Chemerinsky. “Oral arguments conclude with important #freespeech and civil rights cases.”

Chemerinsky: Oral arguments conclude with important free speech and civil rights cases. https://t.co/iVqKQhbRke #SCOTUS @BerkeleyLaw

— ABA Journal (@ABAJournal) April 4, 2023

Source: Twitter

What is a ‘true threat’?

Over a half-century ago, in United States v. Watts (1969), the court held that true threats are speech unprotected by the First Amendment. Robert Watts, then 18, attended a rally and stated, “I have already received my draft classification as 1-A, and I have got to report for my physical this Monday coming. I am not going. If they ever make me carry a rifle, the first man I want to get in my sights is L.B.J.” Watts was arrested and convicted for violating a federal law that makes it a crime to “knowingly and willfully” threaten the life of the president.

The Supreme Court upheld the federal statute but reversed Watts’ conviction. The court said true threats are unprotected by the First Amendment, but they must be distinguished from speech that is just hyperbole. The court concluded that Watts’ statement was “political hyperbole.” The court explained, “The language of the political arena … is often vituperative, abusive and inexact.” Considering the “context, and regarding the expressly conditional nature of the statement and the reaction of the listeners,” the court ruled that Watts’ statement was not a true threat.

Source : http://www.abajournal.com/columns/article/chemerinsky-oral-arguments-conclude-with-important-free-speech-civil-rights-cases