Freedom of Speech: An Overview (CRS Report for Congress)
Premium Purchase PDF for $24.95 (30 pages)
add to cart or
subscribe for unlimited access
Pro Premium subscribers have free access to our full library of CRS reports.
Subscribe today, or
request a demo to learn more.
| Release Date |
Revised Sept. 13, 2024 |
| Report Number |
R47986 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
Victoria L. Killion |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
| Older Revisions |
-
Premium March 29, 2024 (27 pages, $24.95)
add
|
Summary:
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects “the freedom of speech,” but that
protection is not absolute. The Free Speech Clause principally constrains government regulation
of private speech. Speech restrictions imposed by private entities, and government limits on its
own speech, usually do not implicate the First Amendment. Even when the government is
regulating private speech, a court reviewing a First Amendment challenge may decide that the
regulation is consistent with the First Amendment if it is supported by a sufficient governmental
interest and an appropriately tailored approach.
There is no one-size-fits-all test for deciding whether a speech regulation complies with the First Amendment. The analysis
requires parsing out the appropriate legal standards from Supreme Court precedent and often involves applying those
standards to new contexts and mediums of expression. Accordingly, when a litigant raises a First Amendment claim or
defense in court, much of free speech analysis is directed at determining the appropriate legal standards to apply to the
challenged law or government action. That analysis often coalesces around common questions, including the following:
• Is the government regulating speech or non-expressive conduct?
• Is the speech at issue protected or unprotected? Commercial or noncommercial?
• Is the speech regulation content based or content neutral?
Modern First Amendment jurisprudence has gravitated toward the application of tiers of judicial scrutiny ranging from
rational basis review (the minimum standard of constitutionality) to strict scrutiny (a difficult standard for the government to
satisfy). Typically, laws that regulate speech based on its content (i.e., its subject matter, topic, or viewpoint) receive strict
scrutiny, except for regulations of commercial speech (e.g., product advertisements), which typically receive intermediate
scrutiny. Laws that regulate speech in a content-neutral way, including some restrictions on the time, place, or manner of
speech, usually receive a form of intermediate scrutiny.
The context in which the government regulates speech is also important. For example, the Supreme Court has developed
specific tests or frameworks for evaluating the constitutionality of restrictions on student speech in schools, disciplinary
actions against public employees for their speech, and policies limiting who can speak about what on government property.
The type of free speech challenge (e.g., facial or as-applied) might also dictate the appropriate analytical framework.
Thus, a large part of evaluating a federal statute or bill for compliance with the Free Speech Clause involves determining the
appropriate legal standards, which depend on the type of legal challenge or claim, the nature and context of the speech
regulation, how that regulation operates, and the degree of protection for the speech at issue. Application of First Amendment
scrutiny varies according to the test applied but usually involves considering the strength of the government’s asserted
interests and whether the regulation of speech is sufficiently tailored to those interests.
