ABSTRACT
This chapter examines how the freedom to speak is regulated. A particular paradox of liberal states is that they guarantee freedoms but these freedoms require the erection of countless legal controls and regulations to ensure the social order. The Oxford English Dictionary indicates that at the time the Bill of Rights was written, to 'abridge' meant both to 'curtail' and to 'cut short; to reduce to a small size'. The dual meaning of the term probably did not escape the authors of the Bill. They could have written 'curtail' if that was all they meant. The growing liberalization of First Amendment law, liberalization suggests that even the most seditious speech might be protected, has required regulation to develop in new ways. Instead of focusing on exactly what is said, court rulings and police practices have begun exploring the ways that the meaning of what is said its effectiveness is a result of where it is said its geography.
