NCJ Number
136174
Journal
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin Volume: 61 Issue: 4 Dated: (April 1992) Pages: 27-32
Date Published
1992
Length
6 pages
Annotation
The scope of the fighting words doctrine is examined in relation to speech directed to law enforcement officers.
Abstract
The first amendment protects a significant amount of speech directed towards police officers, including name calling and profanity as exemplified in Houston vs Hill. The court ruled that the Houston ordinance under which Hill was convicted violated the first amendment; it criminalized speech directed at an officer because it broadly authorizes police to arrest a person who in any manner verbally interrupts an officer. Courts expect officers to exercise a higher degree of restraint than the average citizen. A review of recent Federal and State court decisions reveal several generally-accepted principles that can assist officers in deciding whether to arrest for speech directed to them. These include a direct threat to officer safety, speech that disrupts performance; a higher standard of communication applied to police; and the ruling that profanity, name calling, and obscenity gestures do not constitute fighting words. To ensure constitutionality of arrests, officers are encouraged to review the first amendment principles and the fighting words doctrine. 35 notes