About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

70 Vand. L. Rev. 651 (2017)
Terrorist Speech on Social Media

handle is hein.journals/vanlr70 and id is 671 raw text is: ESSAY Terrorist Speech on Social Media Alexander Tsesis* The presence of terrorist speech on the internet tests the limits of the First Amendment. Widely available cyber terrorist sermons, instructional videos, blogs, and interactive websites raise complex expressive concerns. On the one hand, statements that support nefarious and even violent movements are constitutionally protected against totalitarian-like repressions of civil liberties. The Supreme Court has erected a bulwark of associational and communicative protections to curtail government from stifling debate through overbroad regulations. On the other hand, the protection of free speech has never been an absolute bar against the regulation of low value expressions, such as calls to violence and destruction. Terrorist advocacy on the internet raises special problems because it contains elements of political declaration and self-expression, which are typically protected by the First Amendment. However, terrorist organizations couple these legitimate forms of communication with instigation, recruitment, and indoctrination. Incitement readily available on social media is sometimes immediate or, more often, calibrated to influence and rationalize future dangerous behaviors. This is the first Essay to analyze all the Supreme Court's free speech doctrines that are relevant to the enactment of a constitutionally justifiable anti-terrorism statute. Such a law must grant the federal government authority to restrict dangerous terrorist messages on the internet, while preserving core First Amendment liberties. Legislators should develop policies and judges should formulate holdings on the bases of the imminent threat of harm, true threats, and material support doctrines. These * Raymond & Mary Simon Chair in Constitutional Law and Professor of Law, Loyola University Chicago School of Law. I am grateful for feedback I received at presentations of this Essay at the University of California Berkeley School of Law, the University of Chicago Law School, the University of Minnesota Law School, the University of Pennsylvania Law School, and the Yale Law School. I received excellent advice on an earlier draft from Enrique Armijo, Benjamin Barnett, Eric Berger, Vincent Blasi, David Han, David Pozen, Ruth Tsesis, and Andrew Tutt. Matthew B. Johnson deserves my special thanks for his exceptional research memo and proofreading. 651

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most