«

»

Dub
07

20 In 1980, the Supreme Court ruled that state constitutions could be interpreted to provide greater protection for expression of opinion and thus for news-gathering measures than the U.S. Constitution. It defended a state`s right to grant a broader right to expression in a shopping mall, even to the detriment of the interest of the owner of the property.21 For example, a man who saved Gerald Ford`s life by striking and seizing an attempted attack while preparing to shoot the president lost a private fact-based case based on the public disclosure of his sexual orientation after a California court ruled that a California court had homosexuality of man was legitimate. public interest, because the courageous act of man has often put stereotyped homosexuals in a positive light. There was also a question worthy of the question of whether President Ford delayed a public statement of gratitude to the man because of his sexual orientation.11 The courts also ruled that the media are not entitled to access copies of video recordings.32 The physical form of the recording is generally not an issue; Computerized data and paper records should be accessible.5 Although public authorities are generally not required to create new documents, dataset administrators are generally obliged – but not in all countries – to search for electronic databases in response to a request. If the document exists electronically, the administrator is also generally required to make it available to the applicant in the electronic format in which it is kept in his biography of Voltaire, Evelyn Beatrice Hall marked the following sentence to illustrate Voltaire`s convictions: „I disapprove of what you are saying, but I will give you your right to say defend it to the death.“ [83] Hall`s quotation is often quoted to describe the principle of freedom of expression. [83] In the 20th century, Noam Chomsky said, „If you believe in freedom of expression, you believe in freedom of expression for opinions you don`t like. Dictators like Stalin and Hitler spoke out in favour of freedom of expression that they only loved. If you are for freedom of expression, it means that you are for freedom of expression, especially for the opinions you despise. [84] Lee Bollinger asserts that „the principle of freedom of expression implies a particular act of creating an area of social interaction for exceptional self-limitation, whose purpose is to develop and demonstrate a social capacity, to control the feelings generated by a multitude of social encounters.“ Bollinger argues that tolerance is a desirable, if not indispensable, value. However, critics argue that society should be affected by those who, for example, directly deny or support genocide (see restrictions above).

[85] Interpretations of violation and offence are culturally and politically relative. In Russia, for example, the principles of damage and misdemeanours have been used to justify Russia`s LGBT propaganda law, which restricts language (and action) on LGBT issues. However, a number of European countries proud of freedom of expression prohibit speech, which could be interpreted as a Holocaust denial. These include Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Slovakia, Switzerland and Romania. [39] The denial of the Armenian genocide is also illegal in some countries. Freedom of expression[2] is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or community to express opinions and ideas without fear of reprisals, censorship or legal sanctions.