[pessimizer]

"The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic..."

~ Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. writing for a unanimous Supreme Court about why antiwar pamphleteers should be jailed.

--

"We think ... that [black people] are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time [of America's founding] considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them."

~ Chief justice Roger Taney, for the Supreme Court majority in Dred Scott vs. Sandford

[droffel]

> "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic..."

The decision for the first quote you used was overturned afterward, over 50 years ago now. It's misrepresentative of the current state of the law and you shouldn't use it as an example.

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-tim...