JAVONTAE SUMMERS v. STATE OF FLORIDA

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that even advocacy of racist violent speech is protected speech if it is not likely to incite or produce such violence
• recognizing that First Amendment protection does not extend to advocacy that “is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action”
• holding that a law was unconstitutional because it prohibited the abstract advocacy of criminal acts
• holding that the First Amendment protected an incendiary speech by a Ku Klux Klan leader to a Klan gathering
• holding that KLu Klux Klansman’s statements to “buiy the niggers” and that “there might have to be some revengeance [sic] taken” were not subject to criminal punishment
• holding that the First Amendment does not protect speech that “is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).