Strict scrutinyIn U.S. constitutional law, when a law infringes upon a fundamental constitutional right, the court may apply the strict scrutiny standard. Strict scrutiny holds the challenged law as presumptively invalid unless the government can demonstrate that the law or regulation is necessary to achieve a "compelling state interest". The government must also demonstrate that the law is "narrowly tailored" to achieve that compelling purpose, and that it uses the "least restrictive means" to achieve that purpose.
Campaign finance in the United StatesThe financing of electoral campaigns in the United States happens at the federal, state, and local levels by contributions from individuals, corporations, political action committees, and sometimes the government. Campaign spending has risen steadily at least since 1990 (for example the average campaign spending for a candidate who won an election to the House of Representatives in 1990 spent 407,600,whiletheaveragewinnerthirtyyearslaterspent2. Seditious libelSedition and seditious libel were criminal offences under English common law, and are still criminal offences in Canada. Sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority to tend toward insurrection against the established order: if the statement is in writing or some other permanent form it is seditious libel. Libel denotes a printed form of communication such as writing or drawing. American scholar Leonard W.
Liberté académiqueLa liberté académique ou liberté universitaire est la liberté que le personnel universitaire doit avoir en matière de recherche scientifique, d'enseignement et d'expression dans le cadre de leur fonction, sans subir de pressions économiques, politiques ou autres. Plusieurs organisations internationales ont adopté des textes, à la contrainte variable, pour tenter de définir et faire respecter la liberté académique. La plupart relient la liberté académique à l'autonomie institutionnelle des établissements d'enseignement.
Actual maliceIn United States law, actual malice is a legal requirement imposed upon public officials or public figures when they file suit for libel (defamatory printed communications). Compared to other individuals who are less well known to the general public, public officials and public figures are held to a higher standard for what they must prove before they may succeed in a defamation lawsuit. This term was adopted by the Supreme Court in its landmark 1964 ruling in New York Times Co. v.
Shouting fire in a crowded theater"Shouting fire in a crowded theater" is a popular analogy for speech or actions whose principal purpose is to create panic, and in particular for speech or actions which may for that reason be thought to be outside the scope of free speech protections. The phrase is a paraphrasing of a dictum, or non-binding statement, from Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.'s opinion in the United States Supreme Court case Schenck v.
