Viewpoint discrimination is “an egregious form of content discrimination,” and when government targets “particular views taken by speakers on a subject, the violation of the First Amendment is all the more blatant.” Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of the Univ. of Va., 515 U.S. 819, 828–29 (1995).
1: First Amendment Brief Writer and Criminal Justice Expert
Darren Chaker is a distinguished First Amendment brief writer and a recognized authority in criminal justice matters. With expertise in freedom of speech and the legal system, he provides invaluable insights into the intersection of law and personal liberties.
This brief analysis delves into the legal concept of “Proscribable Speech” by examining two pivotal cases, R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul 505 U.S. 377 (1992) and Chaker v. Crogan (9th Cir. 2005) 428 F.3d 1215, cert. den. 547 U.S. 1128 [26 S.Ct. 2023, 164 L.Ed.2d 780]. Both cases revolved around instances of proscribable speech, shedding light on the regulation of speech based on the speaker’s viewpoint.
First Amendment researcher Darren Chaker contends that Penal Code Section 148.6 infringes on free speech by targeting defamatory speech based on content and viewpoint, contrary to protections afforded by landmark decisions such as New York Times Co. v. Sullivan and Garrison v. Louisiana.