Other Free Encyclopedias :: Law Library - American Law and Legal Information :: Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1941 to 1953
 

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire - Significance, Court Develops Two-tiered Theory Of The First Amendment, Fighting Words

Appellant

Walter Chaplinsky

Appellee

State of New Hampshire

Appellant's Claim

That a state statute prohibiting certain types of public speech violates the First Amendment guarantee of free speech.

Chief Lawyer for Appellant

Hayden C. Covington

Chief Lawyer for Appellee

Frank R. Kenison

Justices for the Court

Hugo Lafayette Black, James Francis Byrnes, William O. Douglas, Felix Frankfurter, Robert H. Jackson, Frank Murphy (writing for the Court), Stanley Forman Reed, Owen Josephus Roberts, Harlan Fiske Stone

Justices Dissenting

None

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

9 March 1942

Decision

Reasoning that the Constitution does not protect some "well defined and narrowly limited" types of speech, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld both the statute and Chaplinsky's conviction under it.

Related Cases

  • Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919).
  • Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229 (1963).
  • Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971).
  • Bethel School District v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).

Sources

Biskupic, Joan and Elder WittGuide to the U.S. Supreme Court. (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, 1997).

Further Readings

  • Greenawalt, Kent. Fighting Words: Individuals, Communities, and Liberties of Speech. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995.
  • Saunders, Kevin W. Violence as Obscenity: Limiting the Media's First Amendment Protection. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1996.
  • Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties. New York: New York University Press, 1994.

Additional Topics

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire - Significance

Chaplinsky introduced a two-tiered approach to free speech, in which so-called "fighting words" and certain other categories of speech are placed outside the protection of the First Amendment. Walter Chaplinsky, a Jehovah's Witness, had attracted a large and unruly crowd as he distributed religious tracts in the streets of Rochester, New Hampshire. Warned by a city marshall that the crowd was beco…

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire - Court Develops Two-tiered Theory Of The First Amendment

Dismissing Chaplinsky's claim that his right to free exercise of his religion had been violated, Justice Murphy, writing for the unanimous Court, turned to the appellant's other First Amendment claim. The New Hampshire statute did not, the justices concluded, violate freedom of speech. The Court arrived at this conclusion by elaborating a two-tiered theory of the First Amendment.[I]t is well under…

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire - Fighting Words

Although the U.S. Supreme Court has extended considerable constitutional protection to dissident speech, it recognized several areas of expression which fall outside First Amendment protection. These areas of expression include words which are lewd, obscene, profane, libelous, and "fighting." "Fighting words" are so offensive and inflammatory they will likely provoke a violent response from the in…

Thomas v. Collins - Significance [next] [back] Smith v. Allwright - Significance, Reconstruction, A Foot In The Door, A Final Test, An End To State-sponsored Political Discrimination

User Comments Add a comment…