The Heckler's Veto Today

<p>The idea of a heckler’s veto over disfavored speech has been familiar for more than half a century.&nbsp;&nbsp;Roughly put, the heckler’s veto doctrine holds that generally, opponents of a speaker should not be permitted to suppress the speech in question through their own threatened or actual violence.&nbsp; As it turns out, though, the meaning, status, and scope of the idea of a heckler’s veto are today surprisingly far from clear.&nbsp;&nbsp;This Article considers the relevant case law, along with related events and commentary,&nbsp;and concludes that our legal culture is unlikely to arrive at any consensual resolution of many of the conflicts and uncertainties in question.&nbsp; Understanding why no such consensual resolution of basic heckler’s veto questions is likely sheds light on the nature of contemporary legal and political controversies more generally.&nbsp; The Conclusion focuses in particular on the broad contemporary phenomenon of what might be called reduced forensic confidence.</p>