|
板凳
楼主 |
发表于 2016-12-3 02:05:32
|
只看该作者
请看下面的引文:
"From 1791 to the present," however, the First Amendment has "permitted restrictions upon the content of speech in a few limited areas," and has never "include[d] a freedom to disregard these traditional limitations." These "historic and traditional categories long familiar to the bar," —including obscenity, defamation, fraud, incitement, and speech integral to criminal conduct, —are "well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any Constitutional problem."
U.S. v. Stevens, 559 U.S. 460, 468-9 (2010) (internal citations omitted).
不知道有没有人看出来了——这里面的例外列表和其它一些地方不大一样!
当然,区别也不是特别的大,基本上还是一致的,除了一些表述方法的不同之处以外,真正有区别的就是:这里略掉了fighting words,而加上了一条speech integral to criminal conduct——“与犯罪行为不可分割的语言”。
拿这条往上面三个例子一套,那就没有什么问题了。但是,这一条是从哪里来的呢?它到底是什么意思呢?其它几个例外——特别是fraud和incitement——从字面上看难道不也是属于“与犯罪行为不可分割的语言”吗?为什么要单列出来呢? |
评分
-
查看全部评分
|