Is there a clear legal standard for speech that constitutes ‘incitement’ to riot?
Multiple U.S. Supreme Court cases have helped determine the legal definition for speech that aims to incite a riot, which is not constitutionally protected.
The current standard derives from a 1969 Supreme Court decision involving a Ku Klux Klan leader. The Court determined that speech inciting “imminent lawless action” which is “likely to incite or produce such action” isn't protected.
The Court has often given wide leeway to fiery words that may sound aggressive or provocative. In 1949, when a speech by a Chicago priest inspired an “angry and turbulent crowd,” the Court ruled that only speech that produces a “clear and present danger” can be restricted. In 1982, the Court ruled that speech advocating political, social and economic change is protected, but noting that speech which incites a riot is not.
