And again you are wrong. This time on the concept of free speech.
Free speech just means government can’t pass laws restricting speech. Does not mean you do not suffer consequences from a private party. To the effect a corporation banning you for your speech. Being removed from a social media site due to your comments. None of that is infringing on your free speech since there are no governmental restrictions on most things said/done. Just a private party wanting no part of the content the other party is providing.
Freedom of speech includes the right:
Not to speak (specifically, the right not to salute the flag).
West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).
Of students to wear black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”).
Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).
To use certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages.
Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971).
To contribute money (under certain circumstances) to political campaigns.
Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976).
To advertise commercial products and professional services (with some restrictions).
Virginia Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 (1976); Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977).
To engage in symbolic speech, (e.g., burning the flag in protest).
Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989); United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990).
Freedom of speech does not include the right:
To incite imminent lawless action.
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969).
To make or distribute obscene materials.
Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).
To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest.
United States v. O’Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).
Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event.
Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).
Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event.
Morse v. Frederick, __ U.S. __ (2007).
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
And again you are wrong. This time on the concept of free speech.
Free speech just means government can’t pass laws restricting speech. Does not mean you do not suffer consequences from a private party. To the effect a corporation banning you for your speech. Being removed from a social media site due to your comments. None of that is infringing on your free speech since there are no governmental restrictions on most things said/done. Just a private party wanting no part of the content the other party is providing.
Freedom of speech includes the right:
Freedom of speech does not include the right: