in its past decisions, the supreme court has reminded us that there are \categories of speech... fully…

in its past decisions, the supreme court has reminded us that there are \categories of speech... fully outside the protection of the first amendment\ (united states v. stevens, 2010). the first amendment has always permitted restrictions on speech. what is the main idea of this passage? lies are a necessary part of communication. for six decades, the supreme court ruled that lies are protected speech. according to past decisions, free speech is not unlimited. lies are not protected speech because they have no social value.

in its past decisions, the supreme court has reminded us that there are \categories of speech... fully outside the protection of the first amendment\ (united states v. stevens, 2010). the first amendment has always permitted restrictions on speech. what is the main idea of this passage? lies are a necessary part of communication. for six decades, the supreme court ruled that lies are protected speech. according to past decisions, free speech is not unlimited. lies are not protected speech because they have no social value.

Answer

Brief Explanations:

The passage emphasizes that the Supreme Court has stated there are speech categories not protected by the First Amendment and that the First Amendment allows speech restrictions. This implies free - speech has limits.

  • The first option about lies being a necessary part of communication is not supported by the text.
  • The second option about six decades of ruling lies as protected speech is incorrect as the text says some speech (including likely lies in certain categories) is not protected.
  • The fourth option about lies having no social value is not the main idea; the main idea is about free - speech limitations.

Answer:

According to past decisions, free speech is not unlimited.