Chilling effect

A chilling effect is a situation where speech or conduct is suppressed or limited by fear of penalization at the hands of an individual or group. For example, the threat of a costly and lengthy lawsuit might prompt self-censorship and have a chilling effect on free speech.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In United States law, chilling effects refer to the stifling effect that vague or overbroad laws may have on legitimate speech and activity typically protected by the First Amendment.

Related Topics:
Law - First Amendment

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The origin of the phrase is unknown; it was in use in the United States by 1965, when William J. Brennan used it in a judicial decision referring to the "chilling effect upon the exercise of First Amendment rights" http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/freedomline/current/guest_commentary/saffire-shield-law.htm; the case in question was Lamont v. Postmaster General, 381 U.S. 301, 85 S.Ct. 1493 (1965). That case invalidated a Federal law that required postal patrons receiving "communist political propaganda" to specifically authorize the delivery of each such piece of mail http://www.spectacle.org/cs/library.html. The phrase was also used as early as 1950, as if it were commonly understood, in a law review article by Harvard Law Professor, Paul A. Freund, in The Supreme Court and Civil Liberties, 4 Vanderbilt Law Review 533, at 539 (1950-1951).

Related Topics:
1965 - William J. Brennan

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

It is important to note that the Lamont case did not center around a law that explicitly outlawed speech; a "chilling effect" can exist even when there is no explicit prohibition of speech in the law at all. In the original decision, the criterion was that the law have a "deterrent effect" on freedom of expression. In general, "chilling effect" is often used in reference to laws or actions that do not explicitly prohibit legitimate speech, but that impose undue burdens.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~