A chilling effect is a term in United States law that describes a situation where speech or conduct is suppressed or limited by fear of penalization at the hands of an individual or group. The United States of America —commonly referred to as the For example, the threat of a costly and lengthy lawsuit might prompt self-censorship and have a chilling effect on free speech. Freedom of speech is the freedom to speak freely without Censorship or Limitation. Since many such suits rely on libel law, the term libel chill is also often used.

Explanation

In United States and Canadian law, chilling effects refer to the stifling effect that vague or overbroad laws may have on legitimate speech and activity expressly protected by the First Amendment. Country to "Dominion of Canada" or "Canadian Federation" or anything else please read the Talk Page Law is a system of rules enforced through a set of Institutions used as an instrument to underpin civil obedience politics economics and society The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the United States Bill of Rights that expressly prohibits the United States Congress Recognition of chilling effects caused substantial change to slander and libel law to eliminate the possibility of political libel cases and remove openings for vexatious litigation. The 16th and 17th century criminal statutes protecting nobility from criticism in England eventually evolved into various categories of political libel (see Slander and libel Vexatious litigation is legal action which is brought regardless of its merits solely to Harass or subdue an Adversary.

Origin of term

The term had been in use in the United States for several years by 1965, when William J. Brennan used it in a judicial decision referring to the "chilling effect [a particular law might have] upon the exercise of First Amendment rights"^[1]; the case in question was Lamont v. Year 1965 ( MCMLXV) was a Common year starting on Friday (link will display full calendar of the 1965 Gregorian calendar. William Joseph Brennan Jr ( April 25, 1906 &ndash July 24, 1997) was an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the Postmaster General, 381 U.S. 301, 85 S. Case citation is the system used in many countries to identify the decisions in past Court cases either in special series of books called reporters Ct. 1493 (1965). That case invalidated a Federal law that required postal patrons receiving "communist political propaganda" to specifically authorize the delivery of each such piece of mail. Propaganda is a concerted set of messages aimed at influencing the opinions or behaviors of large numbers of people ^[2] The phrase was also used as early as 1950, as if it were commonly understood, in a law review article by Harvard Law Professor, Paul A. Freund, in The Supreme Court and Civil Liberties, 4 Vanderbilt Law Review 533, at 539 (1950-1951).

The Lamont case did not center around a law that explicitly outlawed speech; a "chilling effect" can exist even when there is no explicit prohibition of speech in the law at all. In the original decision, the criterion was that the law have a "deterrent effect" on freedom of expression. In general, "chilling effect" is often used in reference to laws or actions that do not explicitly prohibit legitimate speech, but that impose undue burdens.

See also

• Censorship
• Chilling Effects
• Culture of fear
• Prior restraint
• Strategic lawsuit against public participation ("SLAPP")
• Media transparency
• Legal terrorism
• RIAA
• Fear mongering

References

1. ^ Safire Urges Federal Journalist Shield Law
2. ^ purchase of blocking software by public libraries is unconstitutional

External links

• Chilling Effects Clearinghouse, containing many current examples of alleged chilling effects
• Terms associated with libel cases
• Cato Policy Analysis No. 270 Chilling The Internet? Lessons from FCC Regulation of Radio Broadcasting