This is a list of cases that appeared before the Supreme Court of the United States involving the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Cases that consider the First Amendment implications of payments mandated by the state going to use in part for speech by third parties
Cases concerning restrictions on the time, place, and manner of speech
Cases pertaining to whether or not extending protections to speech constitutes government endorsement of speech.
Cases about restrictions on speech by third parties funded by the government.
Cases concerned with the definition of obscenity and whether a particular work or type of material is obscene.
Appeals of criminal convictions for possessing, selling or distributing obscenity that focused on that issue
Cases involving the search and seizure of allegedly obscene material
Cases dealing with civil and administrative regulatory procedures aimed at suppressing or restricting obscenity, such as film-licensing boards or zoning regulations.
Cases involving laws meant to restrict obscenity online
Speech by students in public secondary schools
Cases in which it has been alleged governmental officials retaliated for protected speech made by private citizens who are not employed by said officials.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws respecting an establishment of religion; prohibiting the free exercise of religion; or abridging the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights. In the original draft of the Bill of Rights, what is now the First Amendment occupied third place. The first two articles were not ratified by the states, so the article on disestablishment and free speech ended up being first.
MCI Communications Corporation was a telecommunications company headquartered in Washington, D.C. that was at one point the second-largest long-distance provider in the United States.
In the United States, freedom of speech and expression is strongly protected from government restrictions by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, many state constitutions, and state and federal laws. Freedom of speech, also called free speech, means the free and public expression of opinions without censorship, interference and restraint by the government The term "freedom of speech" embedded in the First Amendment encompasses the decision what to say as well as what not to say. The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized several categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment and has recognized that governments may enact reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on speech. The First Amendment's constitutional right of free speech, which is applicable to state and local governments under the incorporation doctrine, prevents only government restrictions on speech, not restrictions imposed by private individuals or businesses unless they are acting on behalf of the government. The right of free speech can, however, be lawfully restricted by time, place and manner in limited circumstances. Some laws may restrict the ability of private businesses and individuals from restricting the speech of others, such as employment laws that restrict employers' ability to prevent employees from disclosing their salary to coworkers or attempting to organize a labor union.
First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765 (1978), is a U.S. constitutional law case which defined the free speech right of corporations for the first time. The United States Supreme Court held that corporations have a First Amendment right to make contributions to ballot initiative campaigns. The ruling came in response to a Massachusetts law that prohibited corporate donations in ballot initiatives unless the corporation's interests were directly involved.
The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. is an American civil rights organization and law firm based in New York City.
The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) is the oldest and largest national anti-abortion organization in the United States with affiliates in all 50 states and more than 3,000 local chapters nationwide.
Herbert Jay Stern is a trial lawyer, with a national practice in civil and criminal litigation, as well as mediation and arbitration. Earlier in his career, Stern served as a United States district judge of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey and as the United States Judge for Berlin.
Wilfred Feinberg was a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and previously was a United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Rebecca Beach Smith is a senior United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia and a civic leader. Among her many decisions is the 2011 ruling that decided the title to and restrictions upon artifacts salvaged from the wreck of the RMS Titanic.
Robert L. "Bob" Corn-Revere is an American First Amendment lawyer. Corn-Revere is the Chief Counsel at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression and was formerly a partner at Davis Wright Tremaine LLP in Washington, D.C. He is regularly listed as a leading First Amendment and media law practitioner by The Best Lawyers in America (Woodward/White), SuperLawyers Washington, D.C., and by Chambers USA. Best Lawyers in America named him as Washington, D.C.’s 2017 “Lawyer of the Year” in the areas of First Amendment Law and Litigation – First Amendment. He was again named as Best Lawyers’ “Lawyer of the Year” for First Amendment Law for 2019 and 2021, and in Media Law for 2022. In 2022 he was listed in Washingtonian Magazine's Top Lawyers Hall of Fame for Lifetime Achievement.
In the United States, some categories of speech are not protected by the First Amendment. According to the Supreme Court of the United States, the U.S. Constitution protects free speech while allowing limitations on certain categories of speech.
Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, No. 17-1702, 587 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case related to limitations on First Amendment-based free speech placed by private operators. The Court held that a public access station was not considered a state actor for purposes of evaluating free speech issues in a 5–4 ruling split along ideological lines. Prior to the Court's decision, analysts believed that the case had the potential to determine whether limitations on free speech on social media violate First Amendment rights. However, the Court's narrow holding avoided that issue.