Legally Speaking: What is the Heckler’s Veto? | We The Internet TV
Articles Blog

Legally Speaking: What is the Heckler’s Veto? | We The Internet TV

October 19, 2019

(music) [LOU] What is the heckler’s veto? [BARRY] So it’s the notion that
if somebody’s speech is riling people up and they start heckling them, that you shouldn’t be able
to have the hecklers be able to veto the speech of the
person whose speech they don’t like. It’s called the heckler’s veto
whenever you’re able to drown somebody out because
you don’t like what they’re saying. In some cases they’ve called
Catholicism a racket, and obviously Catholics in the
crowd don’t like that, and so… [LOU] Catholics are like,
“Ahhh! Forgive him!” [BARRY] Well that should happen,
but unfortunately it doesn’t. [LOU] Get riled up and say,
“We forgive you! We’ll pray for you!” [BARRY] So, you know,
they start heckling the speaker and threatening the speaker,
and so the police come and they say, “Okay, you gotta stop speaking
because you’re riling up the crowd.” Well, the Supreme Court
has said, “No.” That allowing the hecklers to
veto the offensive speech, it should be the other way around. The law enforcement should tell
the hecklers that they have no right
to stifle the speech, even speech they don’t like,
and so that’s the whole notion
of the heckler’s veto. (music) Hey guys, I hope you enjoyed our video. If you have any questions about the First Amendment or free speech in general, let us know in the comments. And be sure to subscribe to our channel, and make sure to click the little bell icon so you get notified any time we release a new video.

Only registered users can comment.

  1. Or you could just do what most colleges do which is not allow people to speak because other people don’t like what they have to say.

  2. We need to stomp out those who would use their voices to silence those using theirs. No more oppression at the hands of cowards and social terrorists. No more silencing of opposition and no more abominations ruining free speech forever more.

  3. AK-47, the anti heckler tool that works with absolute reliability.

    For larger crowds of unruly hecklers deploy the T-72, when the 125mm HE frag round is just what the doctor ordered.

  4. The first amendment is supposed to guarantee the right of a person (among other things) the RIGHT to free speech. PREVENTING others from exercising theirs while claiming you are yours is NOT free speech. That's the VERY thing this amendment is supposed to protect!
    If someone rents time to speak at a wherever. LEGALLY and then others prevent them. The ones preventing are breaking the first amendment. This is already a law.. It's not complicated and too many ( a LOT on the left) don't get it or don't want to get it.

  5. Although, as US civilians and citizens we have got this one right, of 'Free Speech' meted out of six rights, contained in the first Amendment – we also, ought to bear in mind that we have got three other amendments, chock-full of rights clearly protecting the fact that we may choose to shut the heII up, whenever we might wanna'…

    …just : 'Saying.'

  6. Unfortunately we are at the point where businesses will cancel events when they think the speaker will be heckled/ protested.

  7. I've talked to a few American online friends, and a number of them don't realize that "free speech" as a right is almost exclusively an American thing (a lot of them think it's universal among 1st world modernized countries).

  8. So that means the SUPREME COURT ruled against the LEFTY because they are the type of people that HECKLE and try to drown out the voices of anyone they disagree with because they're BABYS AND SNOW FLAKES

    Watch some will cry when they read this 😂

  9. That is not right either because then the cops are suppressing the hecklers speech I don’t give me wrong I don’t think they should be hackling that person but just maybe remove the two from that place and have two different spots where they can use their freedom of speech away from each other

  10. In Liberal Socialist communities, Heckler's Veto overrides Conservative speech and police action is forbidden against Hecklers? 🙁

  11. Basically, what we need is to acknowledge that people have a range of opinions, some of which you may find disagreeable – however it is incumbent on everyone to grant every human being the dignity of being able to express their opinions- you can argue with them afterwards if you want to.

  12. Really? The example that comes to mind is Catholics?

    I wonder if I could rack my brain and come up with a more relevant example.

    Nope. I can’t think of one.

  13. So, just to clarify…the United States Supreme Court has ruled that it’s okay to use free speech to convey my idea, unless my idea is to hinder the free speech of someone else. Is that the general gist of this, or am I mistaken?

    That like getting into an infinite loop of being offended.
    Person 1: “It offends me that you say that.”
    Person 2: “It offends me that you find that offensive.”
    Etc., etc.

  14. Why can’t general social situations follow parliamentary procedures? Everybody would have an digital copy of Robert’s Rules of Order on their phone, and the Supreme Court wouldn’t be burdened taking on such menial cases…and lawyers would dominate most social conversations (oh wait, they already do).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *