🇳🇱
A supreme court judge explicitly stated that example as an example of illegal speech. As far as I know it has not explicitly been tested in court however.
@freemo @Pantangelini @Romaq @freemo @Pantangelini @Romaq this is actually not true. if you don't want to read the case itself then for a quick rundown you might see https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time-to-stop-using-the-fire-in-a-crowded-theater-quote/264449/
> those who quote Holmes might want to actually read the case where the phrase originated before using it as their main defense. If they did, they'd realize it was never binding law, and the underlying case, U.S. v. Schenck, is not only one of the most odious free speech decisions in the Court's history, but was overturned over 40 years ago.
afaiu the relevant precedent in the US is largely brandenburg v ohio which sets the test as the incitement of "imminent lawless action" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio
note that to at least some extent speech about *future* lawless action remains protected https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hess_v._Indiana
> those who quote Holmes might want to actually read the case where the phrase originated before using it as their main defense. If they did, they'd realize it was never binding law, and the underlying case, U.S. v. Schenck, is not only one of the most odious free speech decisions in the Court's history, but was overturned over 40 years ago.
afaiu the relevant precedent in the US is largely brandenburg v ohio which sets the test as the incitement of "imminent lawless action" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio
note that to at least some extent speech about *future* lawless action remains protected https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hess_v._Indiana
Follow
The quote you just provided and link agreed with everything I said, and yes I read the case.
