CHAPLINSKY V NEW HAMPSHIRE 315 U.S 568 1942 CHAPLINSKY V NEW HAMPSHIRE U.S CONSTITUTION U.S GOV'T JUDICIAL RELIGION COMMUNICATIONS U.S GOVERNMENT AND CONSTITUTION SIGNIFICANCE THIS RULING ESTABLISHED A TWO TIER APPROACH TO FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS THIS APPROACH GUARANTEED FREE EXPRESSION OF IDEAS IN GENERAL BUT IT ALSO STATED THAT CERTAIN KINDS OF SPEECH DID NOT MERIT SUCH PROTECTION IF THAT SPEECH OFFENDED PEOPLE WITHOUT EXPRESSING IDEAS OF ANY REDEEMING SOCIAL VALUE THIS LIMITATION WOULD LATER BECOME A RALLYING POINT FOR MANY PEOPLE WHO BELIEVED IN CONTROLLING PORNOGRAPHY AND COMMERCIAL ADVERTISING BACKGROUND WHILE DISTRIBUTING RELIGIOUS PAMPHLETS A JEHOVAH'S WITNESS NAMED CHAPLINSKY HAD ATTRACTED A HOSTILE CROWD CHAPLINSKY VERBALLY ABUSED A CITY MARSHALL WHO ARRIVED ON THE SCENE CALLING HIM A RACKETEER AND A FASCIST HE ALSO CALLED OTHER OFFICIALS AGENTS OF FASCISTS CHAPLINSKY WAS CONVICTED FOR USING ABUSIVE SPEECH IN PUBLIC WHICH VIOLATED NEW HAMPSHIRE LAW DECISION THIS CASE WAS ARGUED ON FEBRUARY 5 1942 AND DECIDED ON MARCH 9 1942 BY A VOTE OF 9 TO 0 JUSTICE FRANK MURPHY SPOKE FOR THE UNANIMOUS COURT WHICH UPHELD CHAPLINSKY'S CONVICTION THE COURT DECIDED THAT SUCH VERBAL ABUSE HAD NO SOCIAL VALUE OTHER THAN DISTURBING THE PEACE AND SO WAS NOT PROTECTED BY THE FIRST AMENDMENT EXCERPT FROM THE OPINION OF THE COURT THERE ARE CERTAIN WELL DEFINED AND NARROWLY LIMITED CLASSES OF SPEECH THE PREVENTION AND PUNISHMENT OF WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN THOUGHT TO RAISE ANY CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEM THESE INCLUDE THE LEWD AND OBSCENE THE PROFANE THE LIBELOUS AND THE INSULTING OR FIGHTING WORDS THOSE WHICH BY THEIR VERY UTTERANCE INFLICT INJURY OR TEND TO INCITE AN IMMEDIATE BREACH OF THE PEACE IT HAS BEEN WELL OBSERVED THAT SUCH UTTERANCES ARE NO ESSENTIAL PART OF ANY EXPOSITION EXPRESSION OF IDEAS AND ARE OF SUCH SLIGHT SOCIAL VALUE AS A STEP TO TRUTH THAT ANY BENEFIT THAT MAY BE DERIVED FROM THEM IS CLEARLY OUTWEIGHED BY THE SOCIAL INTEREST IN ORDER AND MORALITY
