In the next paragraph, imagine I’m speaking directly to you, the individual reader. WARNING: This is gonna get ugly. So buckle up.
“Listen here, you motherf----r, I will kill you and your family. You know why? Because you’re a rapist and deserve to die. By the way, check out this child pornography I just made. You’re in it. And if you don’t give me a million dollars by nightfall, I’m going to tell the whole world. Or, failing that, let’s say me and you go out and blow up the Empire State Building. Come on. Let’s do it. No? Then I’ll kill you.”
See? Told you it was going to get ugly.
That terrible paragraph, by the way, blows through all nine types of speech that are not protected by the First Amendment. I think I even did them in order: Obscenity, fighting words, defamation, child pornography, perjury, blackmail, incitement to commit lawless action, solicitation to commit crimes, true threats.
Advertisement
So, to be clear, the Supreme Court of the United States — along with, I hope, 100 percent of us here in the audience — believe there should be some limits to the Freedom of Speech.
*****
Since I’ve decided to play the role of “Constitutional Scholar #1” here today, let’s look at the Fourth Amendment, which the Supreme Court monkeyed around with back in 1925, when they allowed for the so-called “motor vehicle exception” which allows police officers to search a car without a warrant so long as they have “probable cause.”
And as anyone who has had their car and persons searched — I have, twice — can tell you, there is enough wiggle room in the term
