Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)—Article 19 states that, "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. The right to freedom of expression has been recognised as a human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights law. Many countries have constitutional law that protects free speech. Terms like free speech, freedom of speech, and freedom of expression are used interchangeably in political discourse. However, in a legal sense, the freedom of expression includes any activity of seeking, receiving, and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used.
Article 19 of the UDHR states that "everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice". The version of Article 19 in the ICCPR later amends this by stating that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals". (Full article...)
Tax protester constitutional arguments are assertions that the imposition of the federal income tax violates the United States Constitution. These kinds of tax protester arguments are distinguished from related statutory arguments and conspiracy arguments, which presuppose the constitutionality of the income tax. Although the most frequent Constitutional arguments are directed towards the validity and effect of the Sixteenth Amendment, arguments exist that the income tax violates some other provision of the Constitution; or that some other provision, that would prevent the assessment of the income tax, was ratified but wrongfully excluded from the Constitution. Other constitutional amendment arguments have been raised by tax protesters. Some argue that imposition of the income tax violates the First Amendmentfreedom of speech and freedom of religion. Protesters argue that the income tax violates the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, the Takings Clause, or the right that no person shall be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". Tax protesters have argued that income taxes impose involuntary servitude in violation of the Thirteenth Amendment. Some tax protesters argue that Americans are citizens of the individual states as opposed to citizens of the United States, as the Fourteenth Amendment was not properly ratified. Another argument is a missing amendment to the Constitution, known as the Titles of Nobility Amendment, which precedes the current Thirteenth Amendment. Another argument raised is that because the federal income tax is progressive, the discriminations and inequalities created by the tax should render the tax unconstitutional. These arguments have been rejected by the courts. The authority of the federal government has been challenged by protesters, arguing that they should be immune from federal income taxation because they are sovereign individuals or natural individuals, have not requested a privilege or benefit from the government, or are outside the "federal zone" (D.C. and various federal enclaves such as military bases). Neither the U.S. Supreme Court nor any other federal court has ruled that an income tax imposed under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is unconstitutional. Under the Supreme Court ruling in Cheek v. United States, a defendant in a tax evasion prosecution who has made arguments that the federal income tax laws are unconstitutional may have the arguments turned against him (or her). Such arguments, even if based on honestly held beliefs, may constitute evidence that helps the prosecutor prove willfulness, one of the elements of tax evasion.
Image 4George Orwell statue at the headquarters of the BBC. A defence of free speech in an open society, the wall behind the statue is inscribed with the words "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear", words from George Orwell's proposed preface to Animal Farm (1945). (from Freedom of speech)
Image 15Restriction of apostasy by country (2020) (from Freedom of speech)
Image 16Orthodox priest Libor Halík with a group of followers. Halík has been chanting daily for over five years against abortion via megaphone in front of a maternity hospital in Brno, Moravia. (from Freedom of speech by country)
Image 17Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)—Article 19 states that, "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." (from Freedom of speech)
Wilhelmus Simon Petrus Fortuijn, known as Pim Fortuyn (February 19, 1948 – May 6, 2002) was a Dutch politician, civil servant, sociologist, author and professor who formed his own party, Pim Fortuyn List (Lijst Pim Fortuyn or LPF) in 2002. Fortuyn provoked controversy with his stated views about multiculturalism, immigration and Islam in the Netherlands. He called Islam "a backward culture", and said that if it were legally possible he would close the borders for Muslim immigrants. He was labelled a far-rightpopulist by his opponents and in the media, but he fiercely rejected this label and explicitly distanced himself from "far-right" politicians such as the Belgian Filip Dewinter, the Austrian Jörg Haider, or Frenchman Jean-Marie Le Pen whenever compared to them. While Fortuyn compared his own politics to centre-right politicians such as Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, he also admired former Dutch Prime MinisterJoop den Uyl, a socialist. Fortuyn however repeatedly described himself and LPF's ideology as pragmatism and not populism. Fortuyn was openlyhomosexual. Fortuyn was assassinated during the 2002 Dutch national election campaign by Volkert van der Graaf. In court at his trial, van der Graaf said he murdered Fortuyn to stop him from exploiting Muslims as "scapegoats" and targeting "the weak members of society" in seeking political power.
It's hard to think of important prosecutions that have not gone forward because reporters have refused to give information. On the other hand, it's hard to make the argument that freedom of the press has been terribly infringed by the legal regime that's been set up. So it may be that the Supreme Court looks at the status quo and says: "Nothing seems terribly wrong with this. People are ignoring a little bit what we said, but it seems to have results that are not too bad, from either perspective."
This is a list of recognized content, updated weekly by JL-Bot (talk·contribs) (typically on Saturdays). There is no need to edit the list yourself. If an article is missing from the list, make sure it is tagged (e.g. {{WikiProject Freedom of speech}}) or categorized correctly and wait for the next update. See WP:RECOG for configuration options.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.svg)
_01.jpg)
.jpg)
