Free Speech Is Sometimes Distasteful, But Libel is Always Illegal

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

In other words, the First Amendment gives you the right to free speech and expression without interference or constraint by the government. Freedom of speech, one could say, is the cornerstone of our country. It’s what makes us democratic.

With that in mind, one could make the argument that rappers, lyricists, or anyone who uses offensive language to another person are entitled to the right of free speech no matter how distasteful the words may be!


In fact, Ira P. Robbins, a law professor from American University told The Oregonian “The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that speech may not be prohibited simply because some may find it offensive. 

However the first amendment does not protect anyone who prints libelous remarks. Libel:  to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact, and is not clearly identified as an opinion. While it is sometimes said that the person making the libelous statement must have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious that the statement would do harm and is untrue. Proof of malice, however, does allow a party defamed to sue for "general damages" for damage to reputation, while an inadvertent libel limits the damages to actual harm (such as loss of business) called "special damages." "Libel per se" involves statements so vicious that malice is assumed and does not require a proof of intent to get an award of general damages. Libel against the reputation of a person who has died will allow surviving members of the family to bring an action for damages.