Loyola University Chicago, School of Law LAW eCommons Faculty Publications & Other Works 2013 Inflammatory Speech: Outrage Versus Intimidation Alexander Tsesis Loyola University Chicago, School of Law,
[email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/facpubs Part of the First Amendment Commons Recommended Citation Tsesis, Alexander, Inflammatory Speech: Outrage Versus Intimidation, 97 Minn. L. Rev. 1145 (2013). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by LAW eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications & Other Works by an authorized administrator of LAW eCommons. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. Article Inflammatory Speech: Offense Versus Incitement t Alexander Tsesis INTRODUCTION First Amendment jurisprudence has produced a tense in- terplay between libertarian and public safety concerns.! While the Supreme Court has typically found content restrictions on speech to infringe the individual right to self-expression,2 it has also determined that the regulation of intentional intimidation,S • 3 group defamation, and advice to terrorists are constitutional. These contrasting emphases on liberty and safety have been ev- ident from the differing treatments of outrageous and threaten- ing speech. Most recently, the Court ruled in favor of belligerent fu- neral protestors' expressive interests over a mourner's claim that he suffered severe emotional distress from their bellicosi- ty.4 On a separate matter, the Court found that there is no t Associate Professor of Law, Loyola University Chicago School of Law. I am grateful for the advice of Ian Bartrum, John Bronsteen, Laura Cisneros, Danielle Citron, Jessie Hill, Roberta Kwall, Marcia McCormick, Helen Norton, Karen Petroski, and Ofer Raban.