The Heckler's Veto Today

Abstract

The idea of a heckler's veto over disfavored speech has been familiar for more than half a century. Roughly put, the heckler's veto doctrine holds that opponents of a speaker should not be permitted to suppress the speech in question through their own threatened or actual violence. As it turns out, though, the meaning, status, and scope of the idea of a heckler's veto are today surprisingly far from clear. Part II considers the relevant case law. Part III discusses related events and commentary. This Article concludes that American legal culture is unlikely to arrive at any consensual resolution of many of the conflicts and uncertainties in question. Understanding why no such consensual resolution of basic heckler's veto questions is likely to shed light on the nature of contemporary legal and political controversies more generally.