Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 6 - Conclusion

  • Ioanna Tourkochoriti, National University of Ireland, Galway
  • Book:
    Freedom of Expression
    Published online:
    29 October 2021
    Print publication:
    11 November 2021, pp 231-249

  • Summary

    The conclusion evaluates the tendency to overdetermine the content of freedom of expression in France versus the tendency to underdetermine the content of the same liberty in the United States. It engages in a reflection on whether principles and rules elaborated in the past to meet concrete sociopolitical needs are still relevant to address contemporary concerns in the understanding of the limits of rights. It includes reflections on how variety in the protection of freedom of speech can be instructive in view of finding criteria that balance between expressive freedoms and other values when they are in conflict. The United States may be overprotecting freedom of speech in some respects and France may be underprotecting the same freedom. The chapter engages with contemporary debates on expressive freedoms and proposes criteria for government intervention to limit expression (or not) in each one of these cases. It proposes criteria to decide when the reason of the citizen is to be trusted over the reason of the state and the other way around.