Make No Law: The First Amendment Podcast http://makenolaw.ltn.libsynpro.com/website en Ken White explores the background of important First Amendment cases and the personalities and history that led to them. Join Ken, First Amendment litigator and law blogger at Popehat.com, as he interviews some of the people behind America’s most important free speech cases. https://megaphone.imgix.net/podcasts/fd1ddee2-c59d-11eb-b1fa-7b61a560ed07/image/make-no-law-cover-iTunes.jpg?ixlib=rails-4.3.1&max-w=3000&max-h=3000&fit=crop&auto=format,compress Make No Law: The First Amendment Podcast http://makenolaw.ltn.libsynpro.com/website no episodic By Ken White of Popehat.com Legal Talk Network Ken White explores the background of important First Amendment cases and the personalities and history that led to them. Join Ken, First Amendment litigator and law blogger at Popehat.com, as he interviews some of the people behind America’s most important free speech cases. Ken White explores the background of important First Amendment cases and the personalities and history that led to them. Join Ken, First Amendment litigator and law blogger at Popehat.com, as he interviews some of the people behind America’s most important free speech cases.

]]> Legal Talk Network distro@legaltalknetwork.com https://feeds.megaphone.fm/LTN4153488764 INTRODUCING: For the Innocent Season 3 | Amanda Knox, JJ Velasquez, and More https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/for-the-innocent/2025/09/amanda-knox-jj-velasquez-and-more-for-the-innocent-season-3-trailer Hosted by Michael Semanchik, For the Innocent exposes the shocking reality of wrongful convictions through raw, first-person stories from the exonerated. Season 3 returns September 9th featuring powerful accounts from Amanda Knox, JJ Velasquez, Bruce Lisker— three exonerees whose names have become synonymous with injustice— and more.  Through their voices, uncover how the justice system failed them, what it took to win back their freedom, and the lifelong impact of being branded guilty while innocent. Plus, hear legal and criminal experts break down the systemic flaws from false confessions and eyewitness misidentifications to flawed forensic science and corrupt police officers. This season uncovers the truth behind America’s most haunting wrongful convictions.  Season One and Two are now available. Subscribe to the show on ⁠⁠⁠Legal Talk Network⁠⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Mon, 08 Sep 2025 20:53:00 -0000 bonus Legal Talk Network Hosted by Michael Semanchik, For the Innocent exposes the shocking reality of wrongful convictions through raw, first-person stories from the exonerated. Season 3 returns September 9th featuring powerful accounts from Amanda Knox, JJ Velasquez, Bruce Lisker— three exonerees whose names have become synonymous with injustice— and more.  Through their voices, uncover how the justice system failed them, what it took to win back their freedom, and the lifelong impact of being branded guilty while innocent. Plus, hear legal and criminal experts break down the systemic flaws from false confessions and eyewitness misidentifications to flawed forensic science and corrupt police officers. This season uncovers the truth behind America’s most haunting wrongful convictions.  Season One and Two are now available. Subscribe to the show on ⁠⁠⁠Legal Talk Network⁠⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Hosted by Michael Semanchik, For the Innocent exposes the shocking reality of wrongful convictions through raw, first-person stories from the exonerated. Season 3 returns September 9th featuring powerful accounts from Amanda Knox, JJ Velasquez, Bruce Lisker— three exonerees whose names have become synonymous with injustice— and more. 

Through their voices, uncover how the justice system failed them, what it took to win back their freedom, and the lifelong impact of being branded guilty while innocent. Plus, hear legal and criminal experts break down the systemic flaws from false confessions and eyewitness misidentifications to flawed forensic science and corrupt police officers. This season uncovers the truth behind America’s most haunting wrongful convictions. 

Season One and Two are now available.

Subscribe to the show on ⁠⁠⁠Legal Talk Network⁠⁠.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 350 no The F-Bomb On April 26, 1968, Paul Robert Cohen walked down the corridor of the Los Angeles County Courthouse at the corner of Grand and 1st. He didn’t start a fight, he didn’t make any threats, he didn’t even hold up a sign, but he did wear a jacket. This jacket featured “STOP THE WAR,” two peace signs, and the phrase “FUDGE THE DRAFT” (only it didn’t say “fudge”). The result was a court battle over whether the government has the power to punish the use of the word fuck because many find it offensive. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Mon, 29 Nov 2021 20:07:00 -0000 full 2 1 Legal Talk Network On April 26, 1968, Paul Robert Cohen walked down the corridor of the Los Angeles County Courthouse at the corner of Grand and 1st. He didn’t start a fight, he didn’t make any threats, he didn’t even hold up a sign, but he did wear a jacket. This... On April 26, 1968, Paul Robert Cohen walked down the corridor of the Los Angeles County Courthouse at the corner of Grand and 1st. He didn’t start a fight, he didn’t make any threats, he didn’t even hold up a sign, but he did wear a jacket. This jacket featured “STOP THE WAR,” two peace signs, and the phrase “FUDGE THE DRAFT” (only it didn’t say “fudge”). The result was a court battle over whether the government has the power to punish the use of the word fuck because many find it offensive. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices On April 26, 1968, Paul Robert Cohen walked down the corridor of the Los Angeles County Courthouse at the corner of Grand and 1st. He didn’t start a fight, he didn’t make any threats, he didn’t even hold up a sign, but he did wear a jacket. This jacket featured “STOP THE WAR,” two peace signs, and the phrase “FUDGE THE DRAFT” (only it didn’t say “fudge”). The result was a court battle over whether the government has the power to punish the use of the word fuck because many find it offensive.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 1692 Imminent Lawless Action https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2020/10/imminent-lawless-action Ken White explores how the First Amendment has handled inflammatory speech, from Schenck to the current Brandenburg standard and all the way up to today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Wed, 28 Oct 2020 18:23:00 -0000 Imminent Lawless Action full 1 13 Legal Talk Network In 1919, The US Supreme Court in Schenck v. United States established the rule that if words create a "clear and present danger" to incite criminal activity or violence, the government has the right to prevent and punish that speech. For nearly fifty... Ken White explores how the First Amendment has handled inflammatory speech, from Schenck to the current Brandenburg standard and all the way up to today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Ken White explores how the First Amendment has handled inflammatory speech, from Schenck to the current Brandenburg standard and all the way up to today.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 2129 no I Know It When I See It https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2020/06/i-know-it-when-i-see-it Host Ken White dives into the famously ambiguous obscenity standards set forth by the United States Supreme Court. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Wed, 03 Jun 2020 20:29:20 -0000 I Know It When I See It full 1 12 Legal Talk Network How do you know when something’s obscene? It’s not exactly an easy question. Plenty of now respected works were, at one point, declared obscene and subject to judicial scrutiny - James Joyce’s Ulysses, Allen Ginsberg’s Howl, and George Carlin... Host Ken White dives into the famously ambiguous obscenity standards set forth by the United States Supreme Court. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 1695 yes Deplatformed: Social Media Censorship and the First Amendment https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2019/08/deplatformed-social-media-censorship-and-the-first-amendment Host Ken White looks at the legal bases of arguments made by critics of social media sites moderation and shows why Twitter, Facebook, and Youtube bans are legally protected. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Wed, 28 Aug 2019 18:33:46 -0000 Deplatformed: Social Media Censorship and the First Amendment full 1 11 Legal Talk Network Politically conservative voices have been arguing recently that social media outlets such as Twitter, Facebook, and Youtube have been illegally censoring their views. They claim, as a result of their political leanings, that they are being... Host Ken White looks at the legal bases of arguments made by critics of social media sites moderation and shows why Twitter, Facebook, and Youtube bans are legally protected. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 1695 yes Gag https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2019/04/gag Criminal or civil, plaintiff or defendant — what’s the one piece of legal advice all should follow? Shut up! That being said, should a judge be able to make you do this? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:05:42 -0000 Gag full 1 10 Legal Talk Network Criminal or civil, plaintiff or defendant — what’s the one piece of legal advice all should follow? Shut up! That being said, should a judge be able to make you do this? In this episode of Make No Law, the First Amendment Podcast by Popehat.com,... Criminal or civil, plaintiff or defendant — what’s the one piece of legal advice all should follow? Shut up! That being said, should a judge be able to make you do this? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 1991 no The F-Bomb https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2018/11/the-f-bomb On April 26, 1968, Paul Robert Cohen walked down the corridor of the Los Angeles County Courthouse at the corner of Grand and 1st. He didn’t start a fight, he didn’t make any threats, he didn’t even hold up a sign, but he did wear a jacket. This jacket featured “STOP THE WAR,” two peace signs, and the phrase “FUDGE THE DRAFT” (only it didn’t say “fudge”). The result was a court battle over whether the government has the power to punish the use of the word fuck because many find it offens Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Thu, 29 Nov 2018 22:36:15 -0000 The F-Bomb full 1 9 Legal Talk Network On April 26, 1968, Paul Robert Cohen walked down the corridor of the Los Angeles County Courthouse at the corner of Grand and 1st. He didn’t start a fight, he didn’t make any threats, he didn’t even hold up a sign, but he did wear a jacket. This... On April 26, 1968, Paul Robert Cohen walked down the corridor of the Los Angeles County Courthouse at the corner of Grand and 1st. He didn’t start a fight, he didn’t make any threats, he didn’t even hold up a sign, but he did wear a jacket. This jacket featured “STOP THE WAR,” two peace signs, and the phrase “FUDGE THE DRAFT” (only it didn’t say “fudge”). The result was a court battle over whether the government has the power to punish the use of the word fuck because many find it offens Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 1692 yes Bonus: The Mailbag Episode https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2018/09/bonus-the-mailbag-episode Host Ken White answers common questions his listeners have about freedom of speech and the First Amendment. He addresses the misleading claim that “hate speech is not free speech,”, explains the case that challenged President Trump’s ability to block people on Twitter, and talks about how anti-SLAPP statutes work. Ken also takes advantage of the opportunity to discuss yelling on the internet and the constitutional right to petition the government. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Wed, 12 Sep 2018 11:05:00 -0000 Bonus: The Mailbag Episode bonus 1 8 Legal Talk Network While the idea of free speech seems straightforward enough, its execution can be a little messy. Current events especially have underscored the complexity of what is protected by law and what is a punishable offense. Luckily, there are First Amendment... Host Ken White answers common questions his listeners have about freedom of speech and the First Amendment. He addresses the misleading claim that “hate speech is not free speech,”, explains the case that challenged President Trump’s ability to block people on Twitter, and talks about how anti-SLAPP statutes work. Ken also takes advantage of the opportunity to discuss yelling on the internet and the constitutional right to petition the government. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 2098 yes Fighting Faiths https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2018/07/fighting-faiths Everyone loves a good redemption story. Maybe that's because it helps us believe it's never too late to change. But how does the same Justice who decided Schenck v. United States, a low point for First Amendment jurisprudence, become the ultimate source of famous First Amendment concepts and rhetoric? In this episode of Make No Law, the First Amendment Podcast by Popehat.com, host Ken White explores Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’s transformation into the First Amendment hero we know him as today. To do this, Ken discusses the Sedition Act of 1918, Holmes’s dissension in United States v. Abrams, and the discourse with his friends and colleagues that ultimately swayed his opinion on free speech. He also talks to Professor Thomas Healy, First Amendment and constitutional law professor at Seton Hall and author of “The Great Dissent: How Oliver Wendell Holmes Changed His Mind And Changed The History Of Free Speech In America.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Fri, 27 Jul 2018 15:01:37 -0000 full 1 8 Legal Talk Network Everyone loves a good redemption story. Maybe that's because it helps us believe it's never too late to change. But how does the same Justice who decided Schenck v. United States, a low point for First Amendment jurisprudence, become the ultimate... Everyone loves a good redemption story. Maybe that's because it helps us believe it's never too late to change. But how does the same Justice who decided Schenck v. United States, a low point for First Amendment jurisprudence, become the ultimate source of famous First Amendment concepts and rhetoric? In this episode of Make No Law, the First Amendment Podcast by Popehat.com, host Ken White explores Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’s transformation into the First Amendment hero we know him as today. To do this, Ken discusses the Sedition Act of 1918, Holmes’s dissension in United States v. Abrams, and the discourse with his friends and colleagues that ultimately swayed his opinion on free speech. He also talks to Professor Thomas Healy, First Amendment and constitutional law professor at Seton Hall and author of “The Great Dissent: How Oliver Wendell Holmes Changed His Mind And Changed The History Of Free Speech In America.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Everyone loves a good redemption story. Maybe that's because it helps us believe it's never too late to change. But how does the same Justice who decided Schenck v. United States, a low point for First Amendment jurisprudence, become the ultimate source of famous First Amendment concepts and rhetoric?

In this episode of Make No Law, the First Amendment Podcast by Popehat.com, host Ken White explores Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’s transformation into the First Amendment hero we know him as today. To do this, Ken discusses the Sedition Act of 1918, Holmes’s dissension in United States v. Abrams, and the discourse with his friends and colleagues that ultimately swayed his opinion on free speech. He also talks to Professor Thomas Healy, First Amendment and constitutional law professor at Seton Hall and author of “The Great Dissent: How Oliver Wendell Holmes Changed His Mind And Changed The History Of Free Speech In America.”

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 1766 no Fire in a Crowded Theater https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2018/06/fire-in-a-crowded-theater “You can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater” is one of the most commonly used First Amendment catchphrases -- but does it really support exceptions to free speech? The answer to this question can be found in the writings of Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. He penned the phrase in 1919, not to justify moderate limits on speech, but to justify government prosecution of those speaking out against the draft. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Thu, 28 Jun 2018 21:18:00 -0000 Fire in a Crowded Theater full 1 7 Legal Talk Network “You can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater” is one of the most commonly used First Amendment catchphrases -- but does it really support exceptions to free speech? The answer to this question can be found in the writings of Supreme Court... “You can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater” is one of the most commonly used First Amendment catchphrases -- but does it really support exceptions to free speech? The answer to this question can be found in the writings of Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. He penned the phrase in 1919, not to justify moderate limits on speech, but to justify government prosecution of those speaking out against the draft. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices “You can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater” is one of the most commonly used First Amendment catchphrases -- but does it really support exceptions to free speech? The answer to this question can be found in the writings of Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. He penned the phrase in 1919, not to justify moderate limits on speech, but to justify government prosecution of those speaking out against the draft.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 1821 yes Street https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2018/05/street In June of 1966, Sidney Street heard the news that James Meredith, an icon of the Civil Rights Movement, had been shot on the second day of his March Against Fear. Street, an African American himself, burned the flag and was arrested. Street declared, “If they let that happen to Meredith, we don’t need an American flag.” So sparked the question of whether the government can punish someone for using words to defile or disrespect an American flag. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Wed, 16 May 2018 13:00:00 -0000 Street full 1 6 Legal Talk Network What pushes a 51 year-old decorated World War II veteran to burn the American flag? In June of 1966, Sidney Street heard the news that James Meredith, an icon of the Civil Rights Movement, had been shot on the second day of his March Against Fear.... In June of 1966, Sidney Street heard the news that James Meredith, an icon of the Civil Rights Movement, had been shot on the second day of his March Against Fear. Street, an African American himself, burned the flag and was arrested. Street declared, “If they let that happen to Meredith, we don’t need an American flag.” So sparked the question of whether the government can punish someone for using words to defile or disrespect an American flag. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 2048 yes Crush https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2018/04/crush/ The Animal Crush Video Prohibition Act of 2010 was an animal cruelty prevention law aimed at videos showing women in high heels crushing small animals. But it ended up being used to target Robert Stevens instead. United States v. Stevens is a landmark case that may be the most important First Amendment decision of the 21st Century so far. We examine the case and the question of whether the government can continually come to the Supreme Court with potential exceptions to the First Amendment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Thu, 12 Apr 2018 13:00:00 -0000 Crush full 1 5 Legal Talk Network The Animal Crush Video Prohibition Act of 2010 was an animal cruelty prevention law aimed at videos showing women in high heels crushing small animals. While the law took aim at these videos, it ended up being used to target Robert Stevens instead.... The Animal Crush Video Prohibition Act of 2010 was an animal cruelty prevention law aimed at videos showing women in high heels crushing small animals. But it ended up being used to target Robert Stevens instead. United States v. Stevens is a landmark case that may be the most important First Amendment decision of the 21st Century so far. We examine the case and the question of whether the government can continually come to the Supreme Court with potential exceptions to the First Amendment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 2311 yes Disparagement, Contempt, and Disrepute https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2018/03/disparagement-contempt-and-disrepute Simon Tam named his band “The Slants” as a form of self empowerment, but ran into problems when he tried to tried to register the name as a trademark, and ended up taking the case to the Supreme Court. We examine the Matal v. Tam case in which the Supreme Court vindicated Simon Tam and The Slants, finding that Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act -- which allows the PTO to deny trademarks it finds offense -- violates the First Amendment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Thu, 15 Mar 2018 11:00:00 -0000 Disparagement, Contempt, and Disrepute full 1 4 Legal Talk Network Simon Tam named his band “The Slants” as a way to fight back against racism and take back the word as a form of self-empowerment. But when he tried to register the name as a trademark, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) denied the... Simon Tam named his band “The Slants” as a form of self empowerment, but ran into problems when he tried to tried to register the name as a trademark, and ended up taking the case to the Supreme Court. We examine the Matal v. Tam case in which the Supreme Court vindicated Simon Tam and The Slants, finding that Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act -- which allows the PTO to deny trademarks it finds offense -- violates the First Amendment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 1679 yes On The Job https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2018/02/on-the-job When Richard Ceballos, a deputy district attorney in Los Angeles County, expressed concern about the validity of a search warrant in 2000, he discovered the fuzzy line between free speech rights and the need for government entities to maintain workplace discipline. Ken White explores the Garcetti v. Ceballos case, the results of which saddle government employees with a tough decision when reporting misconduct to their superiors. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Wed, 14 Feb 2018 12:00:00 -0000 On The Job full 1 3 Legal Talk Network When Richard Ceballos, a deputy district attorney in Los Angeles County, expressed concern about the validity of a search warrant in 2000, he discovered the fuzzy line between free speech rights and the need for government entities to maintain... When Richard Ceballos, a deputy district attorney in Los Angeles County, expressed concern about the validity of a search warrant in 2000, he discovered the fuzzy line between free speech rights and the need for government entities to maintain workplace discipline. Ken White explores the Garcetti v. Ceballos case, the results of which saddle government employees with a tough decision when reporting misconduct to their superiors. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 1534 no The Schoolhouse Gates https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2018/01/the-schoolhouse-gates In late 1965, a 13-year-old student named Mary Beth Tinker was suspended for wearing a black armband to school to support a truce in the Vietnam war. Through her parents, Mary sued the school. Ken White, alongside Mary Beth Tinker herself, dives into the Tinker v. Des Moines case and how it has impacted freedom of speech for students on campuses today. While Mary Beth Tinker’s rights were upheld, many plaintiffs in First Amendment cases since have faced less sympathetic courts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Wed, 31 Jan 2018 17:00:00 -0000 The Schoolhouse Gates full 1 2 Legal Talk Network In late 1965, a 13-year-old student named Mary Beth Tinker wore a black armband to Warren Harding Junior High School in Des Moines, Iowa, to support a truce in the Vietnam war. The school suspended Mary Beth Tinker for violating a a policy the... In late 1965, a 13-year-old student named Mary Beth Tinker was suspended for wearing a black armband to school to support a truce in the Vietnam war. Through her parents, Mary sued the school. Ken White, alongside Mary Beth Tinker herself, dives into the Tinker v. Des Moines case and how it has impacted freedom of speech for students on campuses today. While Mary Beth Tinker’s rights were upheld, many plaintiffs in First Amendment cases since have faced less sympathetic courts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 2041 yes Fighting Words https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2018/01/fighting-words/ On April 6, 1940, a Jehovah's Witness named Walter Chaplinsky was arrested for yelling, “You are a God damned racketeer and a damned Fascist and the whole government of Rochester are Fascists or agents of Fascists” at a Rochester, New Hampshire police officer.  The confrontation launched the case Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, which made it all the way to the Supreme Court.  The Court ruled against Chaplinsky, articulating an exception to the First Amendment for so-called “fighting words.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Wed, 31 Jan 2018 15:45:00 -0000 Fighting Words full 1 1 Legal Talk Network On April 6, 1940, a Jehovah's Witness named Walter Chaplinsky was arrested for yelling, “You are a God damned racketeer and a damned Fascist and the whole government of Rochester are Fascists or agents of Fascists” at a Rochester, New Hampshire... On April 6, 1940, a Jehovah's Witness named Walter Chaplinsky was arrested for yelling, “You are a God damned racketeer and a damned Fascist and the whole government of Rochester are Fascists or agents of Fascists” at a Rochester, New Hampshire police officer.  The confrontation launched the case Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, which made it all the way to the Supreme Court.  The Court ruled against Chaplinsky, articulating an exception to the First Amendment for so-called “fighting words.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

]]> 1890 yes