Chilling effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents
This article is about the sociological term. For the online legal defense group, see Chilling Effects

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. For example, the threat of a costly and lengthy lawsuit might prompt self-censorship and have a chilling effect on free speech. Since many such suits rely on libel law, the term libel chill is also often used.

[edit] 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. 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.

[edit] 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. Postmaster General, 381 U.S. 301, 85 S.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.[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.

[edit] See also

[edit] References

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

[edit] External links

Languages