Traditional free speech doctrine is inadequate to account for modern terrorist speech. Unprotected threats and substantially protected lawful advocacy are not mutually exclusive. This Article proposes recognizing a new hybrid category of speech called "terrorizing advocacy. " This is a type of traditionally protected public advocacy of unlawful conduct that simultaneously exhibits the unprotected pathologies of a true threat. This Article explains why this new category confounds existing First Amendment doctrine and details a proposed model for how the doctrine should be reshaped.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||26|
|Journal||Fordham Law Review|
|State||Published - Nov 1 2017|
ASJC Scopus subject areas