Government Heckler's Veto Speech Feiner Free Organization Police

A "heckler's veto" describes a situation where the government asks a person or organization to not do something in order to "preserve the peace" (keep everyone calm, safe, and controlled), because the government believes that if the action "takes place" (happens), another person or group will create problems, especially a dangerous situation.

For example, an organization may be planning a "controversial" (with many strong, differing opinions) speech. The government may be aware that a group of "demonstrators" (protestors) plans to react angrily or violently. In that situation, the government may issue a heckler's veto, telling the organization that it cannot hold the speech as planned. Many people consider this to be a "violation" of the organization's right of free speech, but in some cases the courts have "ruled" (officially decided) that the heckler's veto is "permissible" (allowed) under the law, especially if the government has reason to believe that violence will "ensue" (happen as a result).

One famous "case" (legal decision) involving a heckler's veto was Feiner v. New York. In 1949, a man named Irving Feiner was arrested for making an "inflammatory" (designed to make other people angry) speech. The police "anticipated" (believed something would happen) violence, so they asked Feiner to stop his speech. He "refused" (said no) three times, and then the police "arrested him" (too him to jail). Feiner argued that the arrest was a violation of his right of free speech. But the "Supreme Court" (the highest U.S. court) eventually ruled that the police had correctly used a heckler's veto to "prevent" (not allow to happen) a violent situation.