Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)

Facts: Walter Chaplinsky distributed Jehovah's Witnesses material in Rochester, NH, and irritated several persons by calling all organized religion a "racket." A disturbance ensued, and a city traffic officer asked Chaplinsky to accompany him to the police station. Along the way, they encountered City Marshall Bowering, and Chaplinsky accused Bowering of being a "God damned racketeer" and a "damned Fascist." Chaplinsky was arrested for violating the NH laws which prohibit the speaking of "any offensive, derisive or annoying word to any other person who is lawfully in any street or other public place." Chaplinsky was convicted in a trial court and the NH Superior Court affirmed the conviction.

Substantive Issue: Is speech that incites a breach of the peace protected by the First Amendment?

USSC Ruling: Affirmed 9-0

Reasoning: Justice Frank Murphy wrote for the majority.

• Not all verbal utterances constitute "speech" protect by the First A.
• Even if an utterance is "speech," there is worthwhile speech and worthless speech

Categories of Speech from Chaplinsky:

Worthwhile Speech
Expression that has social value as a step to truth (news reports, editorial/opinion columns, speeches on social issues, political debates, etc.)

Worthless Speech
Expression that has little, if any, social value as a step to truth

1. The lewd, obscene, and profane
2. Slander and libel
3. Insulting or "fighting" words
    a. offensive language, even if it does not provoke a fight (later discarded by the Court in Cohen)
    b. fight-provoking language that tends to incite violence (retained by the Court)

"The test is what ... [persons] of common intelligence would understand would be words and expressions which by general consent are 'fighting words' when said without a disarming smile. . . . Such words, as ordinary ... [persons] know, are likely to cause a fight." (Murphy at p. 573)