...Appeals, the tribunal of last resort in my State. Our United States Supreme Court declared in 315 US 568 : There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited...of the peace. It has been well observed that such are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to...

...the same judgment expressed by this Court in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 US 568, 571-572: ". . . There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited...Constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene .... It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas,...

...the same judgment expressed by this Court in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 US 568, 571-572: ". . . There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited...Constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene .... It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas,...

...struggles with the obscenity question is necessary. As early as 1942, the Court held in dicta that "There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited...Constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene." In all the obscenity cases which have followed, the Court 1000 has never once challenged this basic...

...ACLU's absolutist doctrines. In 1942, the high court laid down a standard that is still valid today: There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited...have never been thought to raise any constitutional problems. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or 'fighting'...

...Witnesses had recently prevailed against local sanctions on free, speech grounds — the Court cited "certain well,defined and narrowly limited classes...have never been thought to raise any Constitutional problems." Along with "the lewd and obscene, the profane. . . .and the insulting or 'fighting' words"...

...is directed at the masses and not to a specific individnal. Words directed at a specific individnal "which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are "fighting words" and not protected by the First Amendment iChaplinsky r New Hampshire, 1942, p....

...Paul,4 the Court extended its prohibition of content discrimination to 'fighting words', defmed as "those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace',5 It was previously established doctrine that fighting words merited a lesser degree of First...

...appeal to raw emotions, temporarily inflamed, rather than to reason. Abusive and insulting words that 'by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace' are scarcely conducive to rational debate: such forms of expression, being 'no essential part of any...

...lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting" words — those words which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.51 In his influential treatise, Tribe criticized the Court for relying on the "persistent" but...