Counterspeech Doctrine

The counterspeech doctrine posits that the proper response to negative speech is to counter it with positive expression. It derives from the theory that audiences, or recipients of the expression, can weigh for themselves the values of competing ideas and, hopefully, follow the better approach.

The counterspeech doctrine is one of the most important free-expression principles in First Amendment jurisprudence.

Following are Supreme Court cases that involved the counterspeech doctrine.

Williams-Yulee v. Florida Bar (2015)

Williams-Yulee v. Florida Bar (2015) said a rule prohibiting judicial
candidates from soliciting money for their campaign did not violate the
First Amendment.

Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Township of Willingboro (1977)

Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Township of Willingboro (1977) invalidated an
ordinance that limited “For Sale” signs in neighborhoods on First Amendment
grounds.

United States v. Alvarez (2012)

In 2012, the Supreme Court overturned the Stolen Valor Act as an
infringement on free speech after the law was used to prosecute a man who
falsely claimed to have won a Congressional Medal. In United States v.
Alvarez, the Court found a better remedy in the counterspeech doctrine.

Whitney v. California (1927)

Justice Louis D. Brandeis’s concurring opinion in defense of free speech in
Whitney v. California (1927) has become a milestone in First Amendment
jurisprudence.

Counterspeech Doctrine

Happy birthday to us – on the day that cleared a road to freedom

Memorial Day: Honoring those who gave all for our freedoms

White House Correspondents’ Dinner: levity, gravity, and a toast to the First Amendment

The origins of academic freedom in the U.S.