What does nuance mean?

What does nuance mean?

subtle distinction

What is a denizen?

1 : inhabitant denizens of the forest. 2 government : a person admitted to residence in a foreign country especially : an alien (see alien entry 2 sense 1b) admitted to rights of citizenship. 3 : one that frequents a place nightclub denizens.

What is the difference between denizen and citizen?

A denizen is simply one who resides in a location. A subject is one who has been declared a member of a nation by a Ruler or State. A citizen is one who has declared himself a member of a nation.

Is denizen a Scrabble word?

DENIZEN is a valid scrabble word.

What part of speech is denizen?

verb (used with object)

What is incendiary speech?

tending to arouse strife, sedition, etc.; inflammatory: incendiary speeches. tending to inflame the senses: an incendiary extravaganza of music and dance.

What is denizen synonym?

inhabitant. nounperson who is resident of habitation. aborigine. addressee. autochthon.

Can a person be incendiary?

Incendiary means more than flammable. ... The speeches you give that rile people up are incendiary. The fires you set are also incendiary, and by setting them you are also likely to be called an incendiary — someone who burns things, more commonly known as an arsonist.

What is obscene speech?

Obscenity is a category of speech unprotected by the First Amendment. Obscenity laws are concerned with prohibiting lewd, filthy, or disgusting words or pictures. ... There are major disagreements regarding obscene material and the government's role in regulation.

Why is some speech unprotected?

The Court generally identifies these categories as obscenity, defamation, fraud, incitement, fighting words, true threats, speech integral to criminal conduct, and child pornography. The contours of these categories have changed over time, with many having been significantly narrowed by the Court.

Is hate speech unprotected?

In Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942), the Supreme Court held that speech is unprotected if it constitutes "fighting words". ... For example, the Supreme Court has held that "threats may not be punished if a reasonable person would understand them as obvious hyperbole", he writes.

What is unprotected speech examples?

Although different scholars view unprotected speech in different ways, there are basically nine categories:

Obscenity.
Fighting words.
Defamation (including libel and slander)
Child pornography.
Perjury.
Blackmail.
Incitement to imminent lawless action.
True threats.

Is hate speech protected by free speech?

Hate speech in the United States cannot be directly regulated due to the basic human right to free speech recognized in the American Constitution.

Is burning a flag illegal?

Johnson as unconstitutional restrictions of public expression. Congress responded to the Johnson decision by passing a Flag Protection Act, only to see the Supreme Court reaffirm Johnson by the same 5–4 majority in United States v. Eichman, declaring that flag burning was constitutionally protected free speech.

Can you go to jail for hate speech in Canada?

The offence is indictable, and carries a maximum penalty of imprisonment not exceeding five years. There is no minimum punishment. The consent of the provincial Attorney General is required for a charge to be laid under this section.

Is hate speech protected in schools?

The U.S. Supreme Court has said that students “do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and expression at the schoolhouse gate.” There is a fundamental distinction between public and private school students under the First Amendment.

Is harassment protected speech?

To summarize, merely offensive harassing speech is protected speech. Speech that rises to the level of discriminatory harassment is not protected speech. Examples of such speech are rare and unusual.

Why is censorship in schools bad?

Censorship is particularly harmful in the schools because it prevents student with inquiring minds from exploring the world, seeking truth and reason, stretching their intellectual capacities, and becoming critical thinkers.

Who won the Bethel vs Fraser case?

In an ironic twist of fate, the lower court's actions enabled Fraser to deliver the commencement address at his high school graduation. The school appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and prevailed by a 7-2 vote. The majority opinion was authored by Chief Justice Warren E.

Why was Matt Fraser suspended?

High school student Matthew Fraser was suspended from school in the Bethel School District in Washington for making a speech including sexual innuendo at a school assembly. The Supreme Court held that his suspension did not violate his First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

What did Matthew Fraser say?

Matthew Fraser speech. government office: "I know a man who is firm -- he's firm in his pants, he's firm in his shirt, his character is firm -- but most . . . of all, his belief in you, the students of Bethel, is firm.

Why did Matthew believe his suspension was unconstitutional?

Matthew believed that he had a First Amendment right to give his speech, and sued the school. ... The school argued that Matthew's speech had clearly violated the school conduct code, and that the First Amendment did not protect Matthew's words in public school. The case eventually went to the Supreme Court.

Who won the Hazelwood case?

Decision: In 1988, the Supreme Court, with one vacancy, handed down a 5-3 decision in favor of the school. The Court reversed the appellate court, and said that public schools do not have to allow student speech if it is inconsistent with the schools' educational mission.

Why did the Supreme Court rule against Fraser in this case?

Fraser, legal case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on J, ruled (7–2) that school officials did not violate a student's free speech and due process rights when he was disciplined for making a lewd and vulgar speech at a school assembly.

What specific student actions did Guiles v Marineau deal with?

Guiles v. Marineau
Subsequent action(s) Cert. denied, 127 S.Ct. 3054 (2007)
Holding
The court held that it is a violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments for a public school to require a student to partially obscure images relating to drugs and alcohol on a shirt criticizing the President of the United States.