In the first amendment, the "Freedom of Speech" holds a lot of weight, and when misinterpreted, can cause unrest and confusion. For many people living in the United States, a common crutch to lean on when talking of taboo topics, such as abortion or religion, is to remind others of their freedom of speech in order to continue vocalizing their opinions; "Freedom of speech, man. It's a free country!" According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, "Speech," is understood as "the communication or expression of thoughts as spoken words," such as utterances as well as public speeches to groups of people. But in fact, the freedom of speech as held under the constitution does not allow all combinations of words, verbal or nonverbal, or visual expressions under the sun. There are limits to the freedom of speech, which sounds like a contradiction, but is understandable in context through the definitive examples of allowable "Speech" proven through supreme court cases. Freedom of Speech does not allow us to absolutely speak freely. .
There have been extensive general guidelines placed on how far speech can go when it starts being hateful. The freedom of speech does not protect against defamation, obscenity, fighting words, causing panic, incitement to crime, or sedition. Aside from these boundaries, which are there to protect others, what types of "speech" falls between the cracks in modern society? .
In the constitution, "Speech" can only be understood by a definition of example, which is constantly being updated as culture changes. The first amendment, which consists of the first 45 words in the Bill of Rights, was ratified in 1791. Since photography was commercially introduced in the late 1830s, the issue of photography under the First Amendment needed to be addressed when the culture changed. The Supreme Court has said that speech or speech conduct, which includes photography, must adhere to specific guidelines to be protected for public use.
