Law Commons^™

Wanted Posters, Bulletproof Vests, And The First Amendment: Distinguishing True Threats From Coercive Political Advocacy, Leigh Noffsinger

Washington Law Review

In February 1999, an Oregon jury returned a $107 million verdict for doctors who successfully argued that antiabortion activists' propaganda, in the form of posters and a web site, constituted true threats in violation of federal law. The judge rejected the activists' argument that the First Amendment protected their speech and instructed that if a reasonable person would have foreseen that the communication would be interpreted as threatening, the jury must find in favor of the plaintiffs. This Comment argues that the dichotomy of analysis under two leading U.S. Supreme Court cases has led to conflicting standards that provide insufficient …