Chilling effect

Part of a series on
Censorship by country
Countries
Algeria Australia Bangladesh Belarus Bhutan Brazil Burma Canada China (PRC) Cuba Denmark Eritrea Finland France Germany Hong Kong India Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Japan Malaysia Maldives Morocco New Zealand North Korea Pakistan Paraguay Poland Portugal Romania Russia Samoa Saudi Arabia Singapore Somalia South Korea Soviet Union Sri Lanka Sweden Taiwan (ROC) Thailand Tunisia Turkey United Kingdom United States Uzbekistan Venezuela Zimbabwe
See also
Freedom of speech by country Internet censorship by country Mass surveillance (in China · East Germany · India · United Kingdom · United States)
v t e

In a legal context, a chilling effect is the inhibition or discouragement of the legitimate exercise of natural and legal rights by the threat of legal sanction.^[1] The right that is most often described as being suppressed by a chilling effect is the US constitutional right to free speech. A chilling effect may be caused by legal actions such as the passing of a law, the decision of a court, or the threat of a lawsuit; any legal action that would cause people to hesitate to exercise a legitimate right (freedom of speech or otherwise) for fear of legal repercussions. When that fear is brought about by the threat of a libel lawsuit, it is called libel chill.^[2] A lawsuit initiated specifically for the purpose of creating a chilling effect may be called a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, or more commonly called; a "SLAPP suit."

"Chilling" in this context normally implies an undesirable slowing. Outside of the legal context in common usage; any coercion or threat of coercion (or other unpleasantries) can have a chilling effect on a group of people regarding a specific behavior, and often can be statistically measured or be plainly observed. For example the news headline "Flood insurance [price] spikes have chilling effect on some home sales,"^[3] and the abstract title of a two‐part survey of 160 college students involved in dating relationships: "THE CHILLING EFFECT OF AGGRESSIVE POTENTIAL ON THE EXPRESSION OF COMPLAINTS IN INTIMATE RELATIONSHIPS."^[4]

Usage

In United States and Canadian law, the term chilling effects refers to the stifling effect that vague or excessively broad laws may have on legitimate speech activity.

However, the term is also now commonly used outside of American legal jargon, such as the chilling effects of high prices^[3] or of corrupt police, or of "anticipated aggressive repercussions" (in say, personal relationships^[4]).

An example of the "chilling effect" in Canadian case law can be found in Iorfida v. MacIntyre where the constitutionality of a criminal law prohibiting the publication of literature depicting illicit drug use was challenged. The court found that the law had a "chilling effect" on legitimate forms of expression and could stifle political debate on issues such as the legalization of marijuana.^[5] The court noted that it did not adopt the same "chilling effect" analysis used in American law but considered the chilling effect of the law as a part of its own analysis.^[6]

Recognition that a law may allow for a chilling effect as a vehicle for political libel or vexatious litigation provides motivation to change such defamation laws, and therefore prevent censorship and the suppression of free speech.^{[citation needed]}

History

The term chilling effect had been in use in the United States since as early as 1950.^[7] The United States Supreme Court first refers to the "chilling effect" in the context of the United States Constitution in Wieman v. Updegraff in 1952.^[8]

It, however, became further used as a legal term when William J. Brennan, a justice of the United States Supreme Court, used it in a judicial decision (Lamont v. Postmaster General) which overturned a law requiring a postal patron receiving "communist political propaganda"^[9] to specifically authorize the delivery.^[10]

The Lamont case, however, did not center around a law that explicitly stifles free speech. The "chilling effect" referred to at the time was a "deterrent effect" on freedom of expression—even when there is no law explicitly prohibiting it. However, in general, "chilling effect" is now often used in reference to laws or actions that do not explicitly prohibit legitimate speech, but that impose undue burdens.^[10]

See also

• Censorship
• Culture of fear
• Fear mongering
• Media transparency
• Prior restraint
• Strategic lawsuit against public participation
• Simon Singh, British author sued by chiropractors in a case widely cited^{[11][12][13][14]} as an example of a chilling effect.

References

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
• Libel Reform Campaign The Chilling Effect of English libel law

v t e Censorship Media regulation Books (books banned) Films (banned films) Internet circumvention Music Post Press Radio Speech and expression Thought Video games Methods Bleeping Book burning Broadcast delay Burying of scholars Censor bars Chilling effect Concision Conspiracy of silence Content-control software Euphemism Minced oath Expurgation Fogging Gag order Heckling Heckler's veto Internet police Memory hole National intranet Newspaper theft Pixelization Prior restraint Propaganda Purge Revisionism Sanitization Self-censorship Speech code Strategic lawsuit Surveillance computer & network mass Verbal offence Whitewashing Word filtering Damnatio memoriae Contexts Blasphemy Criminal Corporate Hate speech Ideological Media bias Moralistic fallacy Naturalistic fallacy Politics Religious (Islamic) Suppression of dissent Systemic bias By country Censorship Freedom of speech Internet censorship Wikiquote Wikisource Wikimedia Commons Wikinews Wiktionary Wikibooks

v t e Law Core subjects Administrative law Constitutional law Contract Criminal law Equity Evidence Law of obligations Procedure Civil Criminal Property law Public international law Public law Restitution Statutory law Tort Other subjects Admiralty law Agricultural law Aviation law Banking law Bankruptcy Commercial law Companies law Competition law Conflict of laws Construction law Consumer protection Cyberlaw Election law Energy law Entertainment law Environmental law Family law Financial regulation Health law Immigration law Intellectual property International criminal law International human rights Labour law Media law Military law Product liability Space law Sports law Tax law Trial advocacy Trust law Unjust enrichment Wills Sources of law Constitution Custom Decree Edict Executive order Delegated legislation Rulemaking Precedent Case law Statute Act of Parliament Legal systems Canon law Civil law Common law Chinese law Jewish law Legal pluralism Roman law Sharia Socialist law Statutory law Xeer Yassa Legal theory Critical legal studies Comparative law Feminist Law and economics History International legal theory Philosophy Sociology Legal institutions Bureaucracy Civil society Election commission Executive Judiciary Legal profession Legislature Military Police Category Index Outline Portal