第一修正における「言論の自由」の目的と範囲につ
いて (マング・マング・ルウィン教授 退職記念号)
著者
金原 宏明
雑誌名
熊本学園大学経済論集
巻
25
号
1-4
ページ
251-274
発行年
2019-03-31
URL
http://id.nii.ac.jp/1113/00003340/
1
➨୍ಟṇ࠾ࡅࡿࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖࡢ┠ⓗ⠊ᅖࡘ࠸࡚
㔠 ཎ ᏹ ᫂
要 旨
ࣥࢱ࣮ࢿࢵࢺࡢᬑཬ࠾ࡼࡧࡑࢀక࠺᪂ࡓ࡞⾲⌧ᙧែࡢฟ⌧ࡼࡾࠊ࣓ࣜ࢝᠇ ἲᏛㄝ࠾࠸࡚ࠊࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ/ࠕಖㆤࠖ༊ศㄽࡀ㔜せ࡞᳨ウㄢ㢟࡞ࡾࡘࡘ࠶ࡿࠋ࠼ࡤࠊ ࣜ࣋ࣥࢪ࣏ࣝࣀࡣࡑࡶࡑࡶࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖྵࡲࢀࡿࡢ ࠸࠺ၥ㢟࡛࠶ࡿࠋ ᮏ✏࡛ࡣࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞᪂ࡓ࡞⾲⌧ᙧែࡶ➨୍ಟṇࢆ㐺⏝ࡍࡁ࠸࠺ၥ㢟ࡢゎ Ỵࡢ๓ᥦసᴗࡋ࡚ࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖࡀఱࢆពࡍࡿࡢࡘࡁ᳨ウࡍࡿࠋ ᚑ᮶ࠊ⾲⌧ࡢ⮬⏤ࡀࡢࡼ࠺࡞౯್ࡢಖㆤࢆ┠ⓗࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡢࡘࡁࠊ⮬ᕫ⤫ࡢ ⌮ㄽࠊẸⓗウ㆟ࡢ⌮ㄽࠊ⮬ᕫ⾲⌧ࡢ⌮ㄽࠊಶேࡢ⮬ᚊࠊ┿ᐇⓎぢࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊᛮࡢ ⮬⏤ᕷሙㄽࡀᣦࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋࡇࢀࡽࡢ⌮ㄽࡼࡗ࡚ࠊࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࢆ⏬ ᐃࡍࡿࡇࡣࠊᅔ㞴࡛࠶ࡿ⪃࠼ࡽࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋࡋࡋࠊ⮬ᕫ⤫ࡢ⌮ㄽࡢᑕ⛬⠊ᅖࢆ ぢ┤ࡍࡇࡼࡗ࡚ࠊࡑࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࢆ⏬ᐃࡍࡿࡇࡣྍ⬟ࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࠋ ࡣࡌࡵ 㸯ࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ/ࠕಖㆤࠖ༊ศㄽ㐃㑥᭱㧗 㸦㸯㸧ࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ/ࠕಖㆤࠖ༊ศㄽ 㸦㸰㸧ุ࠾ࡅࡿࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ/ࠕಖㆤࠖ༊ศㄽ 㸦㸱㸧Stevens-EMA-Alvarez௳ุỴࡢពࡘ࠸࡚ 㸦㸲㸧ᑠᣓ 㸰 ࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡢ⏬ᐃࡘ࠸࡚ 㸦㸯㸧➨୍ಟṇࡢ┠ⓗࡼࡿぢゎ-ࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡢぢゎ- 㸦㸰㸧つ⠊ࡼࡿぢゎ-ࢩࣗࣀ࣮ࡢぢゎ- 㸦㸱㸧ࠕᕷẸࠖࡢᶒ-ࣂࢢ࣡ࢵࢺࡢぢゎ- 㸦㸲㸧ᑠᣓ ࠾ࢃࡾ 䠉㻌㻌㻞㻡㻝㻌䠉2 はじめに ࠕุᡤࡣࠊ❧ἲᗓࡢไᐃࡋࡓࣜ࣋ࣥࢪ࣏ࣝࣀつไἲࢆ㐪᠇ࡍࡁ㸽ࠖၥࢃࢀࡓሙྜࠊ ࢇࡢ⪅ࡀࠕNoࠖ⟅࠼ࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࡋࡋࠊࡇࡢၥ࠸ࢆࠊࠕ࣓ࣜ࢝㐃㑥᭱㧗ࡣࠊ࣭࣭࣭ 㐪᠇ࡍࡿᛮ࠺㸽ࠖኚ᭦ࡋࡓሙྜࠊࠕYesࠖ࠸࠺㏉⟅ࡀቑຍࡍࡿࡼ࠺ᛮࢃࢀࡿࠋ௨ୗ ࡢࡼ࠺࡞ᣦࡀ࠶ࡿࡽ࡛࠶ࡿ1ࠋࣜ࣋ࣥࢪ࣏ࣝࣀつไἲࡣࠊࠕࡑࡢே≀ࡣ࣓࢝ࣛࡢ๓〄ࢆ ࡍࡼ࠺࡞ே≀࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊရᛶࢆḞࡁࠊࡎࡁ⪅ࡔࠖ࠸࠺࣓ࢵࢭ࣮ࢪࡢఏ㐩ࡼࡿᐖᝏࡢ㜵 Ṇࢆ┠ⓗࡋࡓࠊ࠸ࢃࡺࡿෆᐜつไ㸦ࡉࡽࡣぢゎつไ㸧࠶ࡓࡿࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊࣜ࣋ࣥࢪ࣏ ࣝࣀつไἲࡣࠊ࠸ࢃࡺࡿཝ᱁ᑂᰝࡢᇶ‽ࡀ㐺⏝ࡉࢀࡿࡇ࡞ࡿࡀࠊࣜ࣋ࣥࢪ࣏ࣝࣀつไἲ ࡣࠊࡇࡢᇶ‽ࢆࣃࢫ࡛ࡁࡑ࠺࡞࠸ࠋ ཝ᱁ᑂᰝࡢᇶ‽ࡀ㐣ᗘཝ᱁࡛࠶ࡿࡇ⏤᮶ࡍࡿࠊࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞┤ឤⓗ⤖ㄽᑐࡋ࡚ࠊᚑ ᮶ࠊ࠸ࢃࡺࡿࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࡢἲ⌮ࡀࠕᏳᘚ2ࠖࡋ࡚ᶵ⬟ࡋ࡚ࡁࡓࠋChaplinsky v.
New Hampshire௳ุỴ3ࡀᵓ⠏ࡋࡓࠊࡅࢇゝⴥ㸦fighting words㸧➼ࡢ⾲⌧⠊ࢆ➨୍ಟṇ
ࡢ⠊ᅖእ⨨ࡃἲ⌮࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡓࡔࡋࠊࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࡢἲ⌮ࡶࠊ⌧ᅾ࡛ࡣࡶࡣࡸᏳᘚࡢ ᶵ⬟ࢆᯝࡓࡋᚓ࡞࠸ࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࠋ࡞ࡐ࡞ࡽࠊ㐃㑥᭱㧗ࡣࠊUnited States v. Stevens௳ุ Ỵ࠾࠸࡚ࠊ࠶ࡿゝㄽࢆ᪂ࡓࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࡢࣜࢫࢺຍ࠼ࡿࡓࡵࡣࠊࠕఏ⤫ࠖ࠶ࡿ ࠸ࡣࠕṔྐࠖࡢཧ↷ࡀせồࡉࢀࡿࡢࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࢆ᥇⏝ࡋࡓࡽ࡛࠶ࡿ4ࠋࡇࢀࢆ๓ᥦࡍࡿ࡞ ࡽࡤࠊࣜ࣋ࣥࢪ࣏ࣝࣀつไࡣᙜ↛࡞ࡀࡽఏ⤫ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࡢἲ⌮ࡼࡿṇᙜ ࡣ࡛ࡁ࡞࠸ࠋ ⩻ࡗ࡚⪃࠼࡚ࡳࢀࡤࠊࡑࡶࡑࡶࠊࣜ࣋ࣥࢪ࣏ࣝࣀࡣࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖࡢ⾜࠸࠼ࡿࠋ࠼ ࡤࠊࢺࣛࢫࢺἲࡶࠊ౯᱁༠ᐃぢࡽࢀࡿࡼ࠺ࠊ㏻ᖖࡢព࡛ࡢゝㄽࡼࡿሗఏ㐩ࢆࡑࡢ ෆᐜࢆ⌮⏤ࡋ࡚つไࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡋࡋࠊࢺࣛࢫࢺἲࡣࠊ୍⯡ࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤つไ❧ἲᑐ ࡋ࡚㏻ᖖ㐺⏝ࡉࢀࡿࡼ࠺࡞ཝ᱁࡞ᇶ‽ࡀ㐺⏝ࡉࢀࡿࡣ⌮ゎࡉࢀ࡚࠸࡞࠸5ࠋᚩර࣮࢝ࢻࡢ↝༷ ⚗Ṇࡸᅜ↝༷ࡢ⚗Ṇ➼ࡢ⾜Ⅽつไࡣࠊཝ᱁ᗘࡢ㧗ࡵࡽࢀࡓᇶ‽ࡀ㐺⏝ࡉࢀࡓࡶࢃࡽ ࡎ6ࠋ ୖグࡢࡣࠊᚩර࣮࢝ࢻࡢ↝༷ࡸᅜ↝༷࠸࠺⾜Ⅽࡣࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖྵࡲࢀࡿࡀࠊࢺ
1 See Andrew Koppelman, Revenge Pornography and First Amendment Exceptions, 65 EMORY L.J. 661, 662 (2016).
2 Ashutosh Bhagwat, When Speech is not “Speech”, 78 OHIO ST.L.J. 839, 846 (2017). 3 315 U.S. 568 (1942).
4 559 U.S. 460 (2010). 5 See Frederick
Schauer,The Boundaries of the First Amendment: A Preliminary Exploration of Constitutional Salienc e, 117 HARV.L.REV. 1765, 1770-71, 81 (2004).
6 See United States v. O’Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968); Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989).
3 ࣛࢫࢺἲࡼࡾつไࡉࢀࡿሗࡢఏ㐩ࡣࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖྵࡲࢀ࡞࠸⪃࠼ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡇࢆ ๓ᥦࡍࡿࠋࡋࡋࠊࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞ྲྀࡾᢅ࠸ࡢᕪ␗ࡣࡢࡼ࠺ࡋ࡚ṇᙜࡉࢀࡿࡢࠋ ࣥࢱ࣮ࢿࢵࢺࡢᬑཬక࠸ࠊඛᣲࡆࡓࣜ࣋ࣥࢪ࣏ࣝࣀࡸࠊࡶࠊ࣭࢜ࣥࣛࣥࢧ࣮ࣅ ࢫࢆ㏻ࡌ࡚ᚓࡽࢀࡓಶேࢹ࣮ࢱ㸦᳨⣴⤖ᯝ࣭㉎ධᒚṔ࣭ࢯ࣮ࢩࣕࣝࢿࢵࢺ࣮࣡ࢡࡢ㛵ಀ➼㸧 ࡢ㞟࣭㛤♧࣭㈍ࡀၥ㢟࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡇࢀࡽࡀᗈ࠸ព࡛ࡢሗࡢఏ㐩࠶ࡓࡿࡇ ࠸ࡣ࡞࠸ࡀࠊࡑ࠺࡛࠶ࢀࡤࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡀ㐺⏝ࡉࢀࡿࡁ࡞ࡢࠋࡑࡢゎỴࡢࡓࡵࡣࠊ๓ᥦస ᴗࡋ࡚ࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢ࠸࠺ࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖࡀఱࢆពࡍࡿࡢࠊࡑࡢពࢆ⏬ᐃࡍࡿᚲせࡀ࠶ ࡿࡼ࠺ᛮࢃࢀࡿ7ࠋ
1「範囲」/「保護」区分論と連邦最高裁
(1)「範囲」/「保護」区分論 㸺➨୍ಟṇࡢ࠸࠺ࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖࡀఱࢆពࡍࡿࡢ㸼ࠋࡇࡢၥ࠸ࡘࡁࠊࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡣࠊ ࠕ➨୍ಟṇࡢ⠊ᅖࡢၥ㢟ࠖࡋ᳨࡚ウࢆຍ࠼࡚࠾ࡾࠊࡇࡢぢゎࡀ࣓ࣜ࢝᠇ἲᏛ࠾ࡅࡿゝ ㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢศᯒ࠾࠸࡚㔜せ࡞ᆅࢆ༨ࡵ࡚࠸ࡿ8ࠋ ࠕேࡢ㌟యࡀ㙚ࡢ୰࠶ࡿሙྜࠊࡑࡢே㛫ࡣࠊ㙚ࡢ⠊ᅖ࠶ࡿ㸦covered㸧࠸࠼ࡿࠋࡋ ࡋࠊࡑࡢࡇࡣࠊࡑࡢே㛫ࡀᖖᏲࡽࢀࡿ㸦protected㸧ࡇࢆពࡋ࡞࠸ࠋ㙚ࡣࠊᢞ▼ࡽ ࡣேࡢ㌟యࢆಖㆤࡍࡿࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࡀࠊ⅖ࡽࡣಖㆤࡋ࡞࠸ࠖࠋࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡣࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞ẚ䬇 ࢆ⏝࠸࡚ࠊᶒࡢࠕ⠊ᅖ(cover)ࠖࠕಖㆤ㸦protection㸧ࠖࢆㄝ᫂ࡍࡿࠋࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊᙉ࠸ṇᙜ ⌮⏤ࡀ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ⾜Ⅽࡢつไࡀㄆࡵࡽࢀ࡞࠸࠸࠺㛵ಀࡀᡂ❧ࡍࡿሙྜࠊᙜヱ⾜Ⅽࡣࠊᶒ ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ࠶ࡿ࠸࠸࠺ࡿࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊ࠶ࡿᶒࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡀ≉ᐃࡢ⾜Ⅽཬࡪሙྜࠊ ᙜヱ⾜Ⅽࡢไ㝈ࡣࠊࡑࢀࡀᶒࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖෆ࡞࠸ሙྜẚ࡚ࠊᙉ࠸ṇᙜࡀᚲせ࡞ ࡿࠋࡶࡗࡶࠊࡑࡢṇᙜ⌮⏤ࡀ༑ศᙉᗘ࡞ሙྜࡣࠊᶒࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖෆ࠶ࡿᙜヱ⾜Ⅽ ࡶࠕಖㆤࠖࡉࢀ࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺ࠊᙼࡢぢゎ࠾࠸࡚ࠊ࠶ࡿ⾜Ⅽࡀᶒࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ࠶ࡿࡇ ࡣࠊࡑࡢ⾜Ⅽࡢಖ㞀ࡢ⛬ᗘࡀ㧗ࡲࡿࡇࢆពࡍࡿࡲࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊᙜヱ⾜Ⅽࡢ㸦⤯ ᑐⓗ࡞㸧ࠕಖㆤࠖࢆពࡋ࡞࠸ࠋᶒࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࠕಖㆤࠖࡣ༊ูࡉࢀࡿ9ࠋࡇࡢࡇࡣࠊゝ ㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢᴫᛕỴᐃࡶᙜ࡚ࡣࡲࡿࠋࠕ[ゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡼࡗ࡚㸸ᘬ⏝⪅]ࡢࡼ࠺࡞⾜Ⅽࡀࠗ⠊ 7 ➨୍ಟṇ࠾ࡅࡿࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖࡢពࡢ⏬ᐃ㛵ࡍࡿ㑥ㄒࡢඛ⾜ᴗ⦼ࡋ࡚ࠊዉ㡲♸ࠕ࣓ࣜ࢝ྜ⾗ᅜ ᠇ἲಟṇ➨ 1 ᮲ࡢᑕ⛬-ゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ἲ⌮ࡢᵓ㐀㛵ࡍࡿẚ㍑ἲⓗ⪃ᐹ-ࠖబ㈡Ꮫ⤒῭ㄽ㞟 41 ᕳ 3 ྕ 75 㡫௨ ୗ(2008)ࠋ 8 ࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡢ㆟ㄽࢆヲ⣽᳨ウࡍࡿ㑥ㄒᩥ⊩ࡋ࡚ࠊዉ㡲♸ࠕࣇࣞࢹࣜࢵࢡ࣭ࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘-ྜ⾗ᅜ᠇ἲゎ㔘 ࠾ࡅࡿ࣮ࣝࣝࡢព⩏-ࠖ㥖ᮧ⦅࣓ࠗࣜ࢝᠇ἲࡢ⩌ീ ⌮ㄽᐙ⦅࠘99 㡫௨ୗ㸦ᑦᏛ♫࣭2010㸧ࠋ 9 FREDERICK SCHAUER,FREE SPEECH:PHILOSOPHICAL ENQUIRY 89-90 (1982).4 ᅖ࠘⨨ࢀࡿࡢࡀࡲࡎ➨୍Ỵᐃࡉࢀ࡞ࡅࡤ࡞ࡽࡎࠊࡑࡢᚋࠊࡑࢀࡽࡢ⾜Ⅽࡀࠊࡢ ࡼ࠺ࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࡢ⛬ᗘ࠾࠸࡚ಖㆤࡉࢀࡿࡢࡀỴᐃࡉࢀࡿ10ࠖࠋ ࡶࡗࡶࠊᙼࡼࢀࡤࠊࢺࣛࢫࢺἲࡢつไࡀ➨୍ಟṇࡢၥ㢟ࢆᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡍࡣ⌮ゎࡉࢀ ࡚ࡇ࡞ࡗࡓࡼ࠺ࠊ㏻ᖖࡢࠊࠊࠊព࡛ࡢࠊࠊࠊࠊゝㄽࠊࠊ㸦ࠕゝㄒ࣭⤮࣭ఏ⤫ⓗ࡞ⱁ⾡ⓗᡭἲࢆ⏝࠸࡚ࠊᛮ࣭ ሗ࣭ⱁ⾡ⓗឤࢆఏ㐩ࡍࡿࡇ11ࠖ㸧ࡍ࡚ࡀࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࡋ࡚ಖ㞀ࡉࢀࡿࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ ࡲࡓࠊᚩර࣮࢝ࢻࡢ↝༷⚗Ṇࡀ➨୍ಟṇࡢၥ㢟ࡋ࡚ྲྀࡾᢅࢃࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࡼ࠺ࠊ㏻ᖖࡢࠊࠊࠊពࠊࠊ ࡛ࡢゝㄽᙜࡓࡽ࡞࠸ࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࡶࡢࡍ࡚ࡀゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡋ࡚ಖ㞀ࡉࢀ࡞࠸ࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࠊࢃࡅ࡛ࡶ࡞࠸ࠋ ࡑࢀ࡛ࡣࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡣࡢࡼ࠺ᐃࡵࡽࢀࡿࡢࠋࡇࡢၥ㢟ࡣࠊᙜ↛࡞ࡀࡽࠊ ➨୍ಟṇࡢゎ㔘࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊࡑࡢᩥゝࡼࡗ࡚ᐃࡵࡽࢀࡿࡇ࡞ࡿࡀࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡀつᐃࡍࡿ ࡢࡣ࠶ࡃࡲ࡛ࠊࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖࡢಖ㞀࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊࠕゝㄽࠖ༢యࡢಖ㞀࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡇࡽࠊࢩ ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡣࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢ⠊ᅖࡣࠊࠕゝㄽࠖࡢ㏻ᖖࡢពࡼࡗ࡚࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖ ࠸࠺ᩥゝࡢពࡼࡗ࡚ᐃࡲࡿࡇ12ࢆ๓ᥦࡋ࡚ࠊࡑࡢቃ⏺ࢆࠊ㸦ᚋヲࡋࡃ᳨ウࡍࡿࡼ ࠺ࠊ㸧➨୍ಟṇࡢ౯್ࡼࡗ࡚ᐃࡵࡿࡇࢆᙇࡍࡿ13ࠋ (2)判例における「範囲」/「保護」区分論 ࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ/ࠕಖㆤࠖࡢ༊ศࡢၥ㢟ࡘࡁࠊ㐃㑥᭱㧗ࡶࡃ↓⮬ぬ࡛࠶ࡗࡓࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ ࡇࡢၥ㢟㛵ಀࡍࡿࡶࡢࡋ࡚ࠊSpence v. Washington௳ุỴ14ࡢࢫ࣌ࣥࢫࢸࢫࢺࠊ๓ ㏙ࡢࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࡢἲ⌮ࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ ア スペンステストについて Spence௳ุỴ࠾࠸࡚ࠊᅜᖹグྕࡢᙧࢸ࣮ࣉࢆ㈞ࡾࡅࠊࡇࢀࢆ❆ࡽྞࡿ ࡋ࡚࠸ࡓ⿕࿌ேࡣࠊ㇟ᚩ➼ࢆ㈞ࡾࡅࡓᅜࢆᥖࡆࡿࡇࢆ⚗Ṇࡍࡿᕞἲ㐪ࡍࡿࡋ ࡚᭷⨥ࡉࢀࡓࠋࡇࡇ࡛ࡣࠊྑ⿕࿌ேࡢ⾜Ⅽ➨୍ಟṇࡢಖㆤࡀཬࡪࡀதࢃࢀࡓࡀࠊ㐃 㑥᭱㧗ࡣࠊ௨ୗࡢᇶ‽㸦ࢫ࣌ࣥࢫࢸࢫࢺ㸧ࢆ㐺⏝ࡋࠊ⤖ᯝࡋ࡚ࠊ⿕࿌ேࡢ⾜Ⅽ➨୍ 10 Id. at 91. ࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡢぢゎ࠾࠸࡚ࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢಖㆤࡀཬࡪ࠸࠺ၥ㢟㸦ࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡢၥ㢟㸧ࠊ➨୍ಟṇ ࡀཬࢇࡔሙྜࡢ⛬ᗘࡢᙉᗘࡢಖㆤࡀ࠼ࡽࢀࡿ࠸࠺ၥ㢟㸦ࠕಖㆤࠖࡢၥ㢟㸧ࡣࠊ᫂☜༊ูࡉࢀ ࡿࠋSee Schauer, supra note 5, at1771㸦ࠕ➨୍ಟṇࡢቃ⏺㸦boundaries㸧ࡢၥ㢟ࡣࠊࡑࡢᙉᗘ㸦strength㸧 ࡢၥ㢟ࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡀ࠼ࡿಖㆤࡢ⛬ᗘࡢၥ㢟࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࡴࡋࢁࠊࡑࡢᗈࡉ㸦scope㸧ࡢၥ㢟ࠊࡍ࡞ ࢃࡕࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡀ㐺⏝ࡉࢀࡿࡢ࠺⮬యࡢၥ㢟࡛࠶ࡿࠖ㸧.
11 SCHAUER, supra note 9, at 91. 12 Schauer, supra note 5, at 1773.
13 SCHAUER, supra note 9, at 91; Frederick Schauer, Speech and “Speech”- Obscenity and “Obscenity”: An Exercise in the Interpretation of Constitutional Language, 67GEO.L.J. 899, 909 (1979); Schauer, supra note 5, at 1784; Frederick Schauer, Categories and the First Amendment: A Play in Three Acts, 34 VAND. L. REV. 265, 268 (1981)(hereinafter Schauer 1981); Frederick Schauer, The Second-Best First
Amendment, 31 WM.&MARY L.REV. 1,12 (1989)(hereinafter Schauer 1989).
14 418 U.S. 405 (1974).
5 ಟṇࡢಖㆤࢆཬࡰࡋࡓࠋࠕ≉ᐃࡉࢀࡓ࣓ࢵࢭ࣮ࢪࢆఏ㐩ࡍࡿពᅗࡀ࠶ࡾࠊࡘࠊࡑࡢ≧ἣ ࠾࠸࡚ࠊᙜヱ࣓ࢵࢭ࣮ࢪࡀࡑࢀࢆぢࡓࡶࡢࡼࡗ࡚⌮ゎࡉࢀࡿྍ⬟ᛶࡀ㧗ࡗࡓࠖ࠸ ࠼ࡿሙྜࠊᙜヱ⾜Ⅽࡣࠕࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥࡢせ⣲ࢆ༑ศ᭷ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠖࡓࡵࠊ➨୍ಟṇ ࡢಖㆤࡀཬࡪ࠸࠺ᇶ‽࡛࠶ࡿ15ࠋ ࡇࡢᇶ‽⮬యࡣࠊࡑࡢᚋࡶࠊJohnson௳ุỴ࡞ࠊ≉ᐃࡢ⾜Ⅽᑐࡋ࡚➨୍ಟṇࡢಖ ㆤࡀཬࡪࡢ࠸࠺ᩥ⬦࠾࠸࡚⏝ࡉࢀࡓ16ࠋࡓࡔࡋࠊࡇࡢᇶ‽ࡼࡿࠊወጁ࡞⤖ㄽ ࡀᑟࢀࡿྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ࠼ࡤࠊ࣏ࢫࢺࡢᣦࡍࡿࡼ࠺ࠊබࡢᘓ≀ࢫࣉ࣮ࣞ⨁࡛ᨻ ⟇ᢈุࢆⴠ᭩ࡁࡋࡓሙྜࡣࠊࢫ࣌ࣥࢫࢸࢫࢺࢆ‶ࡓࡍࡇ࡞ࡿࡀࠊุᡤࡶࠊࡇࡢࡼ ࠺࡞⾲⌧ࡲ࡛➨୍ಟṇࢆཬࡰࡍࡇࡣ࡞࠸࡛࠶ࢁ࠺17ࠋྠᵝࠊᨻⓗぢゎືᶵࡅ ࡽࢀࡓࡇࡀ᫂ࡽ࡞≢⨥⾜Ⅽ㸦࠼ࡤࠊ9/11ࢸࣟ㸧18ࡸࠊ㢮ᆺⓗࡣᨻⓗぢゎືᶵ ࡅࡽࢀࡓࡇࡀ᫂ࡽ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸≢⨥⾜Ⅽ࣓ࢵࢭ࣮ࢪࡀῧ࠼ࡽࢀࡓሙྜ㸦࠼ࡤࠊࠕ㏿ᗘไ 㝈ᑐࡍࡿࠖࡢ࣓ࢵࢭ࣮ࢪࢆῧ࠼ࡓ㏿ᗘไ㝈㐪㸧19ࡶࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡀཬࡪࡇ࡞ ࡾࡡ࡞࠸ࠋ㏫ࠊ≉ᐃࡢ࣓ࢵࢭ࣮ࢪࡢఏ㐩ࢆពᅗࡋ࡞࠸ⱁ⾡సရࡣࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡣཬࡤ ࡞࠸20ࠋࡑࡢព࠾࠸࡚ࠊዉ㡲ᩍᤵࡢࠊࠕࢫ࣌ࣥࢫ࣭ࢸࢫࢺ⮬యࡣࠊ᫂ࡽࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘ ➼ࡢ࠸࠺ಟṇ➨1᮲ࡢ⠊ᅖࢆ⏬ᐃࡍࡿࡶࡢࡋ࡚ᶵ⬟ࡋ࡞࠸ࠋ࣭࣭࣭ࢫ࣌ࣥࢫ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࡣ࠶ ࡿ⾜Ⅽ࣓ࢵࢭ࣮ࢪᛶࡀ࠶ࡿ࠺ࢆุᐃࡍࡿᇶ‽ࡍࡂࡎࠊࡑࢀ⮬యࡣ౯್୰❧ⓗ࡞ ࡶࡢ21ࠖࡢᣦࡣṇᙜ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ ࡉࡽࡣࠊࣂࢢ࣡ࢵࢺࡢᣦࡍࡿࡼ࠺ࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ࠶ࡿࡀதࢃࢀࡓุỴ ࡣSpenceุỴࡢ๓ᚋࢆၥࢃࡎࡍ࡚ࠊࠕ⾲⌧ⓗ࡞⾜Ⅽ㸦conduct㸧ࠖࡀၥ㢟࡞ࡗࡓࡶࡢ࡛ ࠶ࡿࡇὀពࢆせࡍࡿ22ࠋࠕ㏫ゝ࠼ࡤࠊཱྀ㢌ࡼࡿሙྜ࡛࠶ࢀ➹グࡼࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࢀࠊ࡞ ࢇࡽࡢゝㄒ㸦language㸧ࡀ⏝ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿሙྜࡣᚲ↛ⓗ➨୍ಟṇࡢ┠ⓗࡍࡿ͆ゝ ㄽ͇࠶ࡓࡿᐃࡋ࡚ࡁࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊࡘࠊ㐃㑥᭱㧗ุỴࡣࠊ୍ᗘࡓࡾࡶࠊࡇࡢ 㢟ࢆၥどࡋࡓࡇࡶࠊᑂᰝࡋࡓࡇࡶ࡞࠸23ࠖࡢ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊࠕ㐃㑥᭱㧗ࡀ⌧ᅾ᥇⏝ࡍࡿ ゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢἲ⌮ࡢᇶ♏ࡣࠊ㐃㑥᭱㧗ࡀࡣࡗࡁࡾ㏙ࡓࡇࡣ࡞࠸ࡶࡢࡢࠊ㸺࡚ 15 Id. at 409-11.
16 See, eg., Johnson, 491 U.S. at 404; Clark v. Cmty. for Creative Non-Violence, 468 U.S. 288, 305 (1984)(Marshall, J., dissenting).
17 Robert Post, Recuperating First Amendment Doctrine, 47 STAN.L.REV. 1249, 52 (1995). 18 Amanda Shanor, First Amendment Coverage, 93 N.Y.U.L.REV. 318, 341 (2018). 19 Jed Rubenfeld, The First Amendment’s Purpose, 53 STAN.L.REV. 767, 770-78 (2001). 20 Shanor, supra note 18, at 341.
21 ዉ㡲࣭๓ᥖὀ㸦7㸧87 㡫ࠋ
22 See, eg., Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969); Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989); Spence v. Washington, 418 U.S. 405 (1974).
23 Bhagwat, supra note 2, at 851.
6 ࡢゝㄒࡣゝㄽ࡛࠶ࡿ㸼࠸࠺ᐃࡀ࠶ࡿࡇࡣ᫂ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿ24ࠖࠋ イ 「保護されない言論」の法理について ࣂࢢ࣡ࢵࢺࡢᣦࡀṇࡋ࠸ࡍࢀࡤࠊゝㄒࢆ⏝ࡍࡿゝㄽࡣࠊࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖᙜ ࡓࡽ࡞࠸㝈ࡾࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖྵࡲࢀࡿࠋ (ア)従来の「保護されない言論」法理について ᮏ✏ࡢෑ㢌࠾࠸࡚ࡶ㏙ࡓࡼ࠺ࠊࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࡢἲ⌮ࡣࠊChaplinsky ௳ุỴ࠾࠸࡚ᵓ⠏ࡉࢀࡓࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋᮏ௳࡛ࡣࠊ࢚࣍ࣂࡢドேࡢಙ⪅࡛࠶ࡿ⿕࿌ேࡣࠊ බ㐨࡛ࠊ㆙ᐹᐁࠕ࠾๓ࡣブḭᖌࡢ␆⏕ࡔࠖ➼ࡢ⨬ヒ㞧ゝࢆᾎࡧࡏࡓࡓࡵ᭷⨥ࡉࢀ ࡓࠋ ⿕࿌ேࡀゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࢆᙇࡋࡓࡢᑐࡋࠊ࣐࣮ࣇุ࣮ᐁᇳ➹ࡢἲᘐពぢࡣࠊࠕࡑࡢ ጉᐖ࠾ࡼࡧฎ⨩ࡀఱࡽࡢ᠇ἲୖࡢၥ㢟ࢆᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡍࡣ୍ษ⪃࠼ࡽࢀ࡚ࡇ࡞ࡗࡓࠊ༑ ศᐃ⩏ࡉࢀࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊ⊃ࡃ㝈ᐃࡉࢀࡓゝㄽࡢ✀㢮ࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࡑࢀࡽࡣࠊࡳࡔࡽ࡛⊢〮࡞ ࡶࡢࠊෑᾨⓗ࡞ࡶࡢࠊྡẋᦆⓗ࡞ࡶࡢࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊ㎯ⓗ࡞ࡶࡢࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊ͆ࡅࢇゝ ⴥ͆ࢆྵࡴࠋࡇࢀࡽࡣࠊࡓࡔⓎࡏࡽࢀࡓࡇࡑࢀ⮬యࡼࡗ࡚ࠊேࢆᐖࡋࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ ࡣࠊ༶ᗙබඹࡢᖹ✜ࢆࡍഴྥࢆᣢࡘࠋࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ゝⴥࢆⓎࡍࡿࡇࡣࠊᛮࡢ⾲᫂ ࡗ࡚ࡢᐇ㉁ⓗ࡞せ⣲ࢆࡃᣢࡓࡎࠊࡲࡓࠊ┿ᐇࡢ฿㐩ࡗ࡚ࡢ♫ⓗ౯್ࢆࢃ ࡎࡋ᭷ࡉ࡞࠸ࡓࡵࡑࢀࡽࡽᚓࡽࢀࡿ┈ࡀࠊ⛛ᗎཬࡧ㐨ᚨ࠸࠺♫ⓗ౯್ ࡼࡗ࡚᫂ࡽୖᅇࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿ୍⯡ⓗㄆࡵࡽࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋࠖ㏙ࠊ㏻ᖖࡢព࡛ࡢ ゝㄽࡢ୰ࡶࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢಖㆤࡀཬࡤ࡞࠸ゝㄽ⠊ࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࡇࢆㄆࡵࡓ25ࠋ ࡇࡢุỴ࡛ࡣࠊࡅࢇゝⴥ㸦ࠕᖹᆒⓗ࡞⪅ࢆሗᥙࡁ❧࡚ࡑ࠺࡞ࠊࡢࡢࡋࡾゝⴥ26ࠖ㸧 ࡀࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖヱᙜࡍࡿࡉࢀࡓࡀࠊࡑࡢᚋࠊ᭱㧗ࡣࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢࣜࢫࢺࡢ ࠺ࡕࠊ⊢〮⾲⌧27ࠊྡẋᦆⓗ⾲⌧28ࡘࡁࠊࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖᙜࡓࡿࡋࡓࠋ ྡẋᦆⓗ⾲⌧ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊࡲࡎࠊBeauharnais v. Illinois௳ุỴࡀࠊࠕྡẋᦆⓗ Ⓨゝࡣࠊ᠇ἲࡢಖㆤࡍࡿゝㄽࡢ⠊ᅖࡣ࡞ࡃࠊ㐃㑥᭱㧗࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᕞุᡤࡣࠊᙜヱၥ 㢟ࢆ͂᫂ⓑࡘ⌧ᅾࡢ༴㝤̓࠸࠺ࣇ࣮ࣞࢬࡢୗ࡛⪃៖ࡍࡿᚲせࡣ࡞࠸ࠖ㏙ࠊྡ
24 Id. See also Peter M. Shane, ”The Expanding First Amendment” in an Age of Free Speech Paradox, 78 OHIO ST.L.J. 773 (2017); Amanda Shanor, The New Lochner, 2016 WIS.L.REV.133, 176-82 (2016). 25 315 U.S. at 571-72.
26 Id. at 574.
27 Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957); Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973).
28 Beauharnais v. Illinois, 343 U.S. 250 (1952); New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964).
7 ẋᦆⓗ⾲⌧ࢆࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࡋࡓ29ࠋࡑࡢᚋࠊNew York Times Co. v. Sullivan
௳ุỴ࠾࠸࡚ࠊබ⫋ဨ㸦public office㸧ᑐࡍࡿྡẋᦆࡢᡂ❧ࢆࠊ⾲⌧⪅ࠕ⌧ᐇ ࡢᝏព(actual malice)ࠖࡀㄆࡵࡽࢀࡿሙྜࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊࠕࡑࢀࡀഇ࡛࠶ࡿ▱ࡗ࡚ࠊ ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊഇ࡛࠶ࡿࡑ࠺࡛࡞࠸ࡢࡘ࠸࡚↓ㅛࡶ⪃៖ࡏࡎ࡞ࡉࢀࡓࠖド᫂ ࡉࢀࡓሙྜ㝈ᐃࡋࡓ㸦࠸ࢃࡺࡿ⌧ᐇࡢᝏពࡢἲ⌮㸧30ࠋ
ࢃ࠸ࡏࡘ⾲⌧ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊRoth v. United States௳ุỴ࠾࠸࡚ࠊࠕ࡚ࡢᛮࡣࠊ ࢃࡎ࡛ࡶ♫ⓗ࡞㔜せᛶࢆᣢࡘࡢ࡛࠶ࢀࡤࠊ࣭࣭࣭࡞ಖㆤࢆཷࡅࡿࠋࡋࡋࠊ➨ ୍ಟṇ㛵ࡍࡿṔྐࡣࠊ⊢〮ࡀ㝖እࡉࢀࡿࡇࢆࠊࡑࢀࡀ♫ⓗ౯್ࢆḞ࠸࡚࠸ ࡿࡇᇶ࡙ࡃࡇࢆ♧၀ࡍࡿࠖ㏙ࠊ⊢〮⾲⌧ࢆࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࡋࡓ31ࠋࡇ ࡢⅬ࡛ࡣࠊ⊢〮⾲⌧ヱᙜᛶ㛵ࡍࡿ᫂☜࡞ᇶ‽ࡣᥦ♧ࡉࢀ࡞ࡗࡓࡀࠊᚋࠊMiller v. California௳ุỴ32ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ⊢〮⾲⌧ࡀࠊࠕ(a)’ᖹᆒேࡀ⌧ᅾࡢඹྠయࡢᇶ‽ࢆ㐺⏝ ࡋࡓሙྜ’ࠊᙜヱసရࡀࠊࡑࢀࢆయࡋ࡚ぢ࡚ࡁࠊዲⰍⓗ࡞⯆ッ࠼ࡅ࡚࠸ ࡿࢃࡿࡇࠊ(b)㐺⏝ྍ⬟࡞ᕞἲࡼࡗ࡚᫂☜ᐃ⩏ࡉࢀࡓᛶⓗ⾜Ⅽࢆࠊᙜヱసရࡀࠊ ᫂ࡽᛌ࡞᪉ἲࡼࡗ࡚ࠊᥥࡋࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊ⾲⌧ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡇࠊ(c)ᙜヱసရࡀࠊ ࡑࢀࢆయࡋ࡚ぢࡓࡁࠊ┿ᦸ࡞ᩥᏛⓗࠊⱁ⾡ⓗࠊᨻⓗࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊ⛉Ꮫⓗ౯್ ࢆḞ࠸࡚࠸ࡿࡇ33ࠖࢆ‶ࡓࡍࡶࡢᐃ⩏ࡉࢀࡓ(࣑࣮ࣛᇶ‽㸧ࠋ ࡲࡓࠊ࠸ࢃࡺࡿၟᴗⓗゝㄽࡶࠊࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࡢ㛵ಀ࡛ၥ㢟࡞ࡿࠋၟᴗⓗゝ ㄽࡣࠊ1942ᖺࡢValentine v. Chrestensen௳ุỴ34ࡢⅬ࡛ࡣࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ
እ⨨ࢀ࡚࠸ࡓࠋࡋࡋࠊ1976ᖺࡢVirginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia
Citizens Consumer Council Inc.௳ุỴ࠾࠸࡚ࠊ㐃㑥᭱㧗ࡣࠊࠕᡃࠎࡣࠊᙜヱฟ∧
≀ࡣࡑࢀࡀၟᴗⓗ࡛࠶ࡿ࠸࠺⌮⏤࡛ಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸࠸࠺ᙇࢆᣄ⤯ࡍࡿ35ࠖ㏙ࠊ
ࡉࡽࠊCentral Hudson Gas v. Public Service Comm’n௳ุỴ࠾࠸࡚ࠊၟᴗⓗゝㄽ
ࠊࠕၟᴗⓗゝㄽࡢ࠾࠸࡚ࡣࠊ㸲ࡘࡢࣃ࣮ࢺࡽ࡞ࡿศᯒࡀᒎ㛤ࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋࡲࡎ ➨୍ࠊᙜヱ⾲⌧ࡀ➨୍ಟṇࡼࡗ࡚ಖㆤࡉࢀࡿࢆุ᩿ࡋ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋၟᴗⓗ ゝㄽࡇࡢ᮲㡯ࡀ㐺⏝ࡉࢀࡿࡓࡵࡣࠊᑡ࡞ࡃࡶࠊࡑࢀࡀ㐺ἲ⾜Ⅽ㛵ಀࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛ ࠶ࡾࠊࡘࠊㄗゎࢆᣍࡃࡶࡢ࡛࡞࠸ࡇࡀᚲせ࡛࠶ࡿࠋḟࠊᙇࡉࢀࡿᨻᗓ┈ࡀᐇ 29 343 U.S. at 266. 30 Id. 279-80. 31 354 U.S. at 483-484. 32 413 U.S. 15 (1973). 33 Id. at 24. 34 316 U.S. 52, 54 (1942)㸦ࠕ⣧⢋࡞ၟᴗⓗゝㄽ㛵ࡋ࡚ࠊ᠇ἲࡀࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ไ⣙ࢆᨻᗓᑐࡋ࡚ㄢࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ ࡇࡣ᫂ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠖ㸧. 35 425 U.S. 748, 760 (1976). 䠉㻌㻌㻞㻡㻣㻌䠉
8 ㉁ⓗ࡛࠶ࡿࡀᑂᰝࡉࢀ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋࡶࡋࠊࡇࡢࡘࡢᑂᰝ⫯ᐃⓗ࡞⟅࠼ࡀᚓ ࡽࢀࡓࡋ࡚ࡶࠊࡉࡽࠊᙜヱつไࡀᙇࡉࢀࡿᨻᗓ┈ࢆ┤᥋ಁ㐍ࡍࡿ࠺ࠊ࠾ ࡼࡧࠊᙜヱ┈ࡢಁ㐍ࡗ࡚ᚲせ࡞ࡶࡢ௨ୖᙜヱつไࡀཬࢇ࡛࠸࡞࠸࠺ࢆᑂ ᰝࡋ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸36ࠖࡋ࡚ࠊ࠸ࢃࡺࡿࢭࣥࢺࣛࣝࣁࢻࢯࣥࢸࢫࢺࢆ㐺⏝ࡋࡓࠋࢩ ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡼࢀࡤࠊࠕࡇࡢᇶ‽ࡣࣈࣛࣥࢹࣥࣂ࣮ࢢุỴ࠾࠸࡚᥇⏝ࡉࢀࡓᇶ‽ࡼࡾཝ ᱁ࡉຎࡿࠋࡋࡋࠊ༢࡞ࡿྜ⌮ᛶࡢᇶ‽ࡼࡾࡣཝ᱁ࡉࡢ㧗ࡵࡽࢀࡓᇶ‽ࢆせồࡋࡓ ᐇࡣࠊ⌧ᅾ࡛ࡣࠊၟᴗⓗゝㄽࡀ➨୍ಟṇࡢᑕ⛬ධࢀࡽࢀࡓࡇࢆ♧ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ37ࠖࠋ
ࡉࡽNew York v. Ferber௳ุỴࡣࠊChaplinsky௳ุỴࡢࣜࢫࢺ↓࠸ඣ❺࣏ࣝ
ࣀ38ࡘࡁࠊ௨ୗࡢ⌮⏤ࡽࠊࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖㄆࡵࡓࠋ➨୍ࠊࠕᮍᡂᖺ⪅ࡢ⫗య ⓗ࣭⢭⚄ⓗ⚟♴ࡢಖㆤ39ࠖ࠸࠺┈ࡢࡸࡴࡸࡲࢀࡠ┈ヱᙜᛶ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ➨ࠊࠕᖺ ᑡ⪅ࡼࡿᛶⓗ⾜Ⅽࢆᥥࡋࡓ┿ཬࡧࣇ࣒ࣝࡢ㡺ᕸࡣࠊᮏ᮶ⓗᏊ౪ࡢᛶⓗᦢྲྀ 㛵㐃ࡍࡿࡇ40࡛ࠖ࠶ࡿࠋ➨୕ࠊࠕඣ❺࣏ࣝࣀࡢᗈ࿌ཬࡧ㈍ࡣࠊᅜᐙⓗ㐪ἲࡉࢀ ࡚࠸ࡿ⾜Ⅽᑐࡍࡿ⤒῭ⓗ࡞ືᶵࢆ࠼ࡿྠࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞〇ရࡢ〇㐀ࡗ࡚ ྍḞ࡞せ⣲ࢆ࡞ࡍࠋ͆ゝㄽཬࡧฟ∧ᑐࡍࡿ᠇ἲୖࡢ⮬⏤ࡀࠊࡑࢀࡢ࠼ࡿච㝖ࢆࠊ᭷ຠ ࡞ฮἲ㐪ࡍࡿ⾜ⅭࡢྍḞ࡞せ⣲ࡋ࡚⏝࠸ࡽࢀࡿゝㄽ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ᭩≀ࡲ࡛ཬࡰ ࡍ♧၀ࡉࢀࡓࡇࡣࢇ࡞࠸͇41ࠖࡇ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ➨ᅄࠊඣ❺࣏ࣝࣀࡢ౯್ࡀࠕ ࢇࡢࢃࡎ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࡋࢁࠊ࡞ࡾ㝈ᐃⓗ࡛࠶ࡿ42ࠖࡇ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ➨ࠊඣ❺࣏ࣝࣀ つไࡣࠊ࠸ࢃࡺࡿෆᐜつไ࠶ࡓࡿࡀࠊඛୖࡶࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢಖㆤࡢ᭷↓ࡀࠕゝㄽࡢෆ ᐜᇶ࡙࠸࡚ࠖỴᐃࡉࢀࡿࡇࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࠕไ㝈ࡉࢀࡿࡁᐖᝏࡀࠊၥ㢟࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿ⾲ ⌧㛵ࡍࡿ┈ࢆࠊࡑࢀࡀ௬Ꮡᅾࡋ࡚࠸ࡓࡋ࡚ࡶࠊ࠶ࡲࡾᅽಽⓗୖᅇࡿࡓࡵࠊ ఱࡽࡢࢣ࣮ࢫࣂࢣ࣮ࢫ࡞ᐃࡢ㐣⛬ࢆࡶᚲせࡋ࡞࠸ࠖࡉࢀࡓࡇࡣ⌋ࡋࡃ࡞࠸ࡇ 43ࡽࠊඣ❺࣏ࣝࣀ➨୍ಟṇࡢಖㆤࢆྰᐃࡋ࡚ࡶඛࡋ࡞࠸44࠸࠺⌮⏤ࡽ ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ 36 447 U.S. 557, 566 (1980). 37 Schauer, supra note 5, at 1776-77. 38 458 U.S. 747 (1982).
39 Id. at 756-57. 40 Id. at 759.
41 Id. at 761-62 (quoting Giboney v. Empire Storage & Ice Co., 336 U.S. 490, 498 (1949)). 42 Id. at 762 (quoting Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc., 427 U.S. 50, 66 (1976)). 43 Id. at 763-64.
44 Id.
9
(イ)Stevens事件判決以後の「保護されない言論の法理」について
Chaplinsky௳ุỴࡸRoth௳ุỴࠊFerber௳ุỴࡀゝㄽࡢ౯್ゝཬࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ
ࡇࡽ᫂ࡽ࡞ࡼ࠺ࠊᚑ᮶ࡢࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࡢἲ⌮ࡣࠊࡑࡢゝㄽ⠊ᒓࡍ ࡿゝㄽࡢ౯್ࢆ⪃៖ࡍࡿࡇࢆྰᐃࡋ࡚ࡣ࠸࡞ࡗࡓࠋࡋࡋࠊ2010ᖺࡢStevens௳ ุỴࡣࠊゝㄽࡢ౯್ࢆ⪃៖ࢆࡋ࡚ࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖヱᙜᛶࢆุ᩿ࡍࡿࡇྰᐃⓗ ࡞❧ሙࢆࡗࡓࠋ ࡇࡢุỴ࡛ࡣࠊື≀ᚅࡢᥥࢆၟᴗ┠ⓗ࡛〇㐀ࠊ㈍ࠊᡤ᭷ࡍࡿࡇࢆ㐪ἲࡍࡿ 㐃㑥ἲࡢྜ᠇ᛶࡀதࢃࢀࡓࠋ ࡇࡢἲ௧ࡢྜ᠇ᛶࢆᙇࡍࡿ࠶ࡓࡾࠊᨻᗓࡣࠊFerber௳ุỴ౫ᣐࡋࠊࠕ[ື≀ ᚅࡢᥥࡢ㸸ᘬ⏝⪅]᭱ᑠ㝈ࡢ౯್ࡣ➨୍ಟṇࡢಖㆤ್ࡋ࡞࠸ࠖࡇࠊࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊࠕ୍ ᐃࡢゝㄽࡢ㡿ᇦࡀ➨୍ಟṇࡢಖㆤࢆாཷࡍࡿ࠺ࡣࠊᙜヱゝㄽࡢ౯್ࡑࡢ♫ⓗ ࢥࢫࢺࡢ࢝ࢸࢦࣜ࢝ࣝ࡞⾮㔞ࠖࡼࡿࡇࡀ࡛ࡁࡿᙇࡋࡓ45ࠋ ࠕ࢝ࢸࢦࣜ࢝ࣝ࡞┈⾮㔞ࠖ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠕᐃ⩏ࡅ⾮㔞ࠖᇶ࡙ࡃᨻᗓഃࡢᙇࢆࠊࣟ ࣂ࣮ࢺ㛗ᐁᇳ➹ࡢἲᘐពぢࡣࠊࠕ➨୍ಟṇࡢ⠊ᅖᑐࡍࡿ⛣ࢁ࠸ࡸࡍ࠸㸦free-floating㸧 ᇶ‽࡛࠶ࡾࠊࡑࡢពぢࡣ㦫ࡃࡁࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊࡘࠊ༴㝤࡛࠶ࡿࠋ➨୍ಟṇࡢಖㆤࡣࠊ 㛵㐃ࡍࡿ♫ⓗࢥࢫࢺ౽┈ࡢࢻ࣍ࢵࢡ࡞⾮㔞ࢆࡾ㉺࠼ࡓゝㄽࡢ⠊ࡢࡳཬࡪࡶ ࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸46ࠖࡋ࡚㏥ࡅࡓࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊᨻᗓഃྠࡌࡃFerber௳ุỴ౫ᣐࡋࠊࠕಖㆤ ࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖㄆࡵࡽࢀࡿࡓࡵࡣࠊ┈⾮㔞ࡢࡳ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࠕఏ⤫ࠖ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠕṔྐࠖ ࡢཧ↷ࡀせồࡉࢀࡿࡇࡣ᫂ࡽࡔࡋࡓࠋࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊFerber௳ุỴࡢ᰿ᣐࡣࠊࠕඣ❺ ࣏ࣝࣀࡢᕷሙࡀࡑࡢᇶ♏࡞ࡗࡓᚅ͆ᮏ᮶ⓗ㛵㐃ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ͇ࡇࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࡑࢀࡺ ࠼ࠊ͆ࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞〇ရࡢ〇㐀ࡗ࡚ྍḞ࡞せ⣲͇ࡣࠊ͆ᅜᐙⓗ㐪ἲࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿ ⾜Ⅽ࡛࠶ࡿ͇47ࠖࡇ࠶ࡗࡓࡀࠊࠕ᭷ຠ࡞ฮἲ㐪ࡍࡿ⾜ⅭࡢྍḞ࡞せ⣲48ࠖࢆ ࡞ࡍゝㄽ➨୍ಟṇࡢಖㆤࡀཬࡤ࡞࠸ࡇࡣ᪤☜❧ࡋࡓṔྐⓗᐇ㊶࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡓࠋࡋ ࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊࠕFerber௳ุỴࡣࠊࡑࡢศᯒࢆࠊࡍ࡛ㄆ㆑ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠊ㛗ࡃ☜❧ࡋࡓࠊಖ ㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࡢ⠊౫ᣐࡋ࡚࠸ࡓࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࡑࡢᚋࡢᡃࠎࡢุ᩿ࡶࠊࡇࡢ⌮ゎࢆඹ ᭷ࡍࡿ49ࠖ࠸࠺ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ ௨ୖࡽࠊ᭱㧗ࡣࠊࠕṔྐⓗࡣಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࡀࠊࡋࡋࠊඛ࠾࠸ 45 559 U.S. 460, 469-70 (2010). 46 Id. at 470.
47 Id. at 471 (quoting Ferber, 458 U.S. at 759, 761).
48 Ferber, 458 U.S. at 761-62 (quoting Giboney, 336 U.S. at 498). 49 Stevens, 559 U.S. at 471.
10 ࡚ࡑࡢࡼ࠺᫂☜≉ᐃࡉࢀࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊウㄽࡉࢀ࡚ࡇ࡞ࡗࡓゝㄽࡢ⠊ࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿ ࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࠋࡋࡋࠊࡑ࠺࡛࠶ࡗࡓࡋ࡚ࡶࠊ͆ື≀ᚅࡢᥥ͇ࡀࡑࢀࡽࡢ୰࠶ࡿ ࡇࢆ♧ࡍドᣐࡣᏑᅾࡋ࡞࠸50ࠖࡋ࡚ࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࢆྰᐃࡋࡓࠋ
ࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞❧ሙࡣࠊᭀຊⓗࣅࢹ࢜ࢤ࣮࣒ࡢつไ㛵ࡍࡿBrown v. EMA௳ุỴ51ࠊ
❶ࢆཷࡅࡓࡇࡀ࠶ࡿბࢆࡘࡃࡇࡢつไ㛵ࡍࡿUnited States v. Alvarez௳ุ Ỵ52࠾࠸࡚ࡶ㋃くࡉࢀࡓࠋ≉ࠊAlvarez௳ุỴ࡛ࡣࠊࢣࢿࢹุᐁᇳ➹ࡢἲᘐព ぢ࠾࠸࡚ࠊࠕゝㄽᑐࡍࡿෆᐜつไࡣࠊ୍⯡ࠊἲᘐ࠾࠸࡚㛗ࡃ࡞ࡌࡳࡢ࠶ࡿࠊࡈࡃ ᑡᩘࡢ[⾲⌧ࡢ]Ṕྐⓗ࣭ఏ⤫ⓗ࢝ࢸࢦ࣮ࣜ㝈ᐃࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡁࡢࡳチࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋ ࡇࢀࡽࡢ࢝ࢸࢦ࣮ࣜࡢ୰ࡣࠊ༶ࡢ㐪ἲ⾜Ⅽࢆᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡍࡇࢆពᅗࡋࠊࡘࠊᘬࡁ ㉳ࡇࡋࡑ࠺࡞ၐᑟࠊࢃ࠸ࡏࡘࠊ≢⨥⾜ⅭྍḞ࡞ゝㄽࠊ࠸ࢃࡺࡿ͆ࡅࢇゝⴥ͇ࠊඣ❺ ࣏ࣝࣀࠊブḭࠊ┿ࡢ⬣㏕ࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊᨻᗓ㜵Ṇᶒ㝈ࡀㄆࡵࡽࢀࡿࠊ࡞ࢇࡽࡢ㔜࡛༶ ࡢ⬣ጾࢆᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡍゝㄽࡀྵࡲࢀࡿࠋࡓࡔࡋࠊࡇࡢ᭱ᚋࡢ࢝ࢸࢦ࣮ࣜ࠾ࡅࡿつไࡣ ⥔ᣢࡍࡿࡇࡀࡶࡗࡶᅔ㞴࡞ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࡢࡔࡀࠋ[ᘬ⏝┬␎]53ࠖࡋ࡚ࠊෆᐜつไࡀチ ࡉࢀࡿሙྜࡢࣜࢫࢺࡀࡉࢀࡓࠋ (3)Stevens-EMA-Alvarez事件判決の意味について ࡇࢀࡽࡢุỴࡢ⤖ᯝࠊゝㄽࡢ౯್ᇶ࡙ࡁࠊࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖヱᙜᛶุ᩿ࢆࡍࡿࡇࡀ ᅔ㞴࡞ࡗࡓࡇ࠸ࡣ࡞࠸54ࠋࡋࡶࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢᣑᙇഴྥࡶຍࡍࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࢀࡤࠊ ࣜ࣋ࣥࢪ࣏ࣝࣀࡸ࣭࢜ࣥࣛࣥࢧ࣮ࣅࢫࢆ㏻ࡌࡓಶேࢹ࣮ࢱࡢ㞟࣭㛤♧࣭㈍➼ࡶࠊࠕゝㄒࠖ ࢆ⏝ࡍࡿࡇࠊࡑࢀࢆつไࡍࡿࠕṔྐࠖ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠕఏ⤫ࠖࡀᏑᅾࡋ࡞࠸ࡇࡽࠊ➨୍ಟ ṇࡢゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ྵࡲࢀࡿ࠸࠺⤖ㄽࢆᑟࡃྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࡶࡋࡑ࠺࡞ࢀࡤࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢ⾜Ⅽ ࡣࠊಶேࡢࣉࣛࣂࢩ࣮ࢆⴭࡋࡃᐖࡍࡿࡀࠊࡑࡢᭀ㟢ࡢつไࡀᅔ㞴࡞ࡾࡡ࡞࠸ࠋ ຍ࠼࡚ࠊAlvarez௳ุỴࡢࢣࢿࢹࡢἲᘐពぢࡣࠊࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ/ࠕಖㆤࠖࡢ༊ศㄽࢆ㍍どࡋ ࡚࠸ࡿ࠸࠺ࢱࢩࣗࢿࢵࢺࡢᣦࡀ࠶ࡿ55ࠋࡲࡎࠊࡇࡢุỴࡢࣜࢫࢺࡣࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ ᅖࠖእ⨨ࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡋ⌮ゎ࡛ࡁ࡞࠸⠊ࠊ୍ᗘࡣࠊࡑࡢ⠊యࡀゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ ᅖࠖእ⨨ࢀࡓࡶࡢࡢࠊᚋゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖᡠࡉࢀࡓ⠊ࡀΰᅾࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࢩ 50 Id. at 472. 51 564 U.S. 786, 791-92 (2011). 52 567 U.S. 709, 721-22 (2012). 53 Id. at 717-18.
54 Bhagwat, supra note 2, at 847.
55 Mark Tushnet, The Coverage/Protection Distinction in the Law of Freedom of Speech- An Essay on Meta-Doctrine in Constitutional Law, 25 WM.&MARY BILL RTS. J. 1073, 1093 (2017).
11 ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡀᣦࡍࡿࡼ࠺ࠊ࠼ࡤࠊࢃ࠸ࡏࡘ⾲⌧ࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊ࣑࣮ࣛᇶ‽ࢆ‶ࡓࡍ⾲⌧ࡣࠊ ࠕ┿ᦸ࡞ᩥᏛⓗࠊⱁ⾡ⓗࠊᨻⓗࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊ⛉Ꮫⓗ౯್ࢆḞ࠸࡚࠸ࡿࠖࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࡽࠊゝ ㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖእ࠶ࡿࡋ⌮ゎ࡛ࡁ࡞࠸ࠋࡇࢀᑐࡋ࡚ࠊྡẋᦆⓗ⾲⌧ࡣࠊ୍ᗘ ࡣࠊࡑࡢ⠊యࡀゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖእ⨨ࢀࡓࡶࡢࡢࠊᚋ⌧ᐇࡢᝏពࡢἲ⌮ࡼ ࡗ࡚ゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖᡠࡉࢀࠊࡑࡢ⿕ᐖ⪅ࡢᛶ㉁࠸ࢇࡼࡗ࡚␗࡞ࡿࠕಖㆤࠖࡀ ࠼ࡽࢀࡿࡇ࡞ࡗࡓ56ࠋ ࡉࡽࡣࠊChaplinsky௳ุỴࡢࣜࢫࢺẚ㍑ࡋࡓሙྜࠊࡇࡢࣜࢫࢺࡣࠊࠕᨻᗓ㜵Ṇ ᶒ㝈ࡀㄆࡵࡽࢀࡿࠊ࡞ࢇࡽࡢ㔜࡛༶ࡢ⬣ጾࢆᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡍゝㄽࠖࡀ㏣ຍࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡋ ࡋࠊࡇࡢ⠊ࡢᣦࡋ♧ࡍࡶࡢࡣࠊཝ᱁ᑂᰝࡢᇶ‽ࢆ㐺⏝ࡋࡓ㝿⏝࠸ࡽࢀࡿศᯒ㢮ఝࡍ ࡿࠋࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊࠕࡑࡢ⬣ጾࡣ㔜࡛࠶ࡿࡀࡺ࠼ࠊᨻᗓࡣࡑࡢ㦫␗ࡢᐇ⌧ࢆ㜼Ṇࡍࡿࡇࡘ ࡁࠊࡸࡴࡸࡲࢀࡠ┈ࢆ᭷ࡋ࡚࠾ࡾࠊࡑࢀࡀ༶ⓗ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࡺ࠼ࠊᢚไࡢࡓࡵࡢࡼࡾไ 㝈ⓗ࡛࡞࠸ࡢ㑅ࡧ࠺ࡿᡭẁࡶᏑᅾࡋ࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡢ✀ࡢゝㄽࡣࠊ⠊ᅖࡣ࠶ࡿࡀಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ 57ࠖࠋ (4)小括 ௨ୖ࡛ぢ࡚ࡁࡓࡼ࠺ࠊ⌧ᅾࡢ㐃㑥᭱㧗ࡣࠊࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ/ࠕಖㆤࠖ༊ศㄽࢆ㍍どࡍࡿྠ ࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࢆᣑᙇࡉࡏࡿഴྥ࠶ࡿࠋᚑ᮶࡛࠶ࢀࡤࠊࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࡢ ἲ⌮ࡀゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢ⏝ព࡞ᣑᙇᑐࡍࡿࠕᏳᘚࠖࡋ࡚ᶵ⬟ࡋᚓࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊStevens ௳ุỴ௨㝆ࠊࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࡢἲ⌮ࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞ᶵ⬟ࢆᮇᚅࡍࡿࡇࡣᅔ㞴࡞ࡗࡓࠋ ࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊఱࡽࡢᙧ࡛ゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࢆษࡾศࡅࡿࡇࡀᚲせ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊࢫ࣌ࣥ ࢫࢸࢫࢺࡣࠊゝㄒࡀ⏝ࡉࢀࡓሙྜ㐺⏝ࡉࢀ࡞࠸ࡇࠊࡲࡓࠊ⾲⌧ⓗ⾜Ⅽࡀၥ㢟࡞ࡗࡓ ሙྜ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࡶࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡢ⏬ᐃࡋ࡚ᶵ⬟ࡋ࡞࠸ࡇࡽ㐺ษ࡛࡞࠸ࠋ ࡋࡋࠊࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞㐃㑥᭱㧗ࡢែᗘࢆ๓ᥦࡋࡓࡁࠊࢺࣛࢫࢺἲࡢ౯᱁༠ᐃࡢ➨୍ ಟṇ㐺ྜᛶࡀ┿㠃┠ྲྀࡾୖࡆࡽࢀ࡚ࡋࡲࡗࡓሙྜࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊᮏ✏ࡀෑ㢌࡛ᣲࡆࡓࣜ࣋ࣥ ࢪ࣏ࣝࣀࡢࡼ࠺࡞᪂ࡓⓏሙࡋࡓ⾲⌧ࡢつไ┤㠃ࡋࡓሙྜࠊ㐃㑥᭱㧗ࡣࠊ᪤Ꮡࡢᇶ‽ࡢ ཝ᱁ࡉࢆᙅࡵࡿ㸦ࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢ࠼ࡿࠕಖㆤࠖࡢ⛬ᗘࢆୗࡆࡿ㸧࠸࠺ᡭẁࢆྲྀࡿ ࡇ࡞ࡾࡡ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸58ࠋ
56 Schauer, supra note 5, at 1775-76. 57 Tushnet, supra note 55, at 1092-94.
58 Schauer 1981 at 271-72; Tushnet, supra note 55, at 1114-16; Leslie Kendrick, First Amendment Expansionism, 56WM.&MARY L.REV. 1199, 1217 (2015).
12
2 「範囲」の画定について
ࡇࡇ࡛ࡣࠊ࣓ࣜ࢝᠇ἲᏛㄝࢆ⣲ᮦࡋ࡚ࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡢ⏬ᐃᇶ‽ࡘ࠸᳨࡚ウࡍ ࡿࠋ (1)第一修正の目的による見解-シャウアーの見解- ア 第一修正の基礎理論に基づく記述的説明の困難性 ࡲࡎࠊࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡢぢゎࢆぢࡼ࠺ࠋᙼࡼࢀࡤࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢ⠊ᅖࡣࠊࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖ ࠸࠺ᩥゝࠊ࠾ࡼࡧࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢ౯್ࡼࡗ࡚⏬ᐃࡉࢀࡿࠋࡘࡲࡾࠊࠕ⠊ᅖእ⨨ࢀࡓྂ ⓗ࡞ࢣ࣮ࢫࡢ≉ᚩࡢ୍ࡘࠊ⠊ᅖࡽእࢀࡿࡢỴᐃࡀࠊไ㝈ࡢṇᙜࡢྍྰࡢ᳨ウ࡞ࡋ ࠊᙜヱⓎゝࡑࢀ⮬యࡢ᭷ࡍࡿ➨୍ಟṇࡢ౯್ࡢࡳᇶ࡙࠸࡚⾜ࢃࢀࡿ࠸࠺ࡶࡢࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ ࡑࡢࡓࡵࠊၥ㢟࡞ࡗࡓⓎゝࡀ➨୍ಟṇࡢ┠ⓗࡃ㛵ಀࡋ࡞࠸ሙྜࠊྜ⌮ᛶࡢᇶ‽ࡢ㐺 ⏝ࢆ㝖ࡁࠊᨻᗓࡢつไ⌮⏤ࢆ᳨ウࡍࡿᚲせࡣ࡞࠸59ࠖࠋ ࡓࡔࡋࠊᙼࡶࠊุୖࠊࠕಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ゝㄽࠖࡉࢀࡓࡶࡢࡢ࡚ࡀゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ እ࠶ࡿ⪃࠼࡚࠸ࡿࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋඛᣲࡆࡓࢃ࠸ࡏࡘ⾲⌧㸦୍㈏ࡋ࡚ゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ ᅖࠖእ࠶ࡿ㸧ྡẋᦆⓗ⾲⌧㸦ᚋゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ⨨ࢀࡓ㸧㛵ࡍࡿᙼ ࡢ⌮ゎࢆẚ㍑ࡋ࡚ࡳࢀࡤ᫂ࡽ࡞ࢁ࠺60ࠋྠᵝࠊᙼࡣၟᴗⓗゝㄽࡶࠊ⌧ᅾ࡛ࡣゝㄽࡢ ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ࠶ࡿࡍࡿ61ࠋ ࡉࡽࠊᙼࡀゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖእศᯒࡍࡿゝㄽࡣࠊุࡀ᫂♧ⓗ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊ ▱ࡽࡠ㛫➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖእ⨨࠸ࡓࡶࡢࡶྵࡲࢀࡿࠋ࠼ࡤࠊࢺࣛࢫࢺἲࡢ౯᱁ ༠ᐃ62࡛࠶ࡿࠋ ࡑࢀ࡛ࡣࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢゝㄽࢆ➨୍ಟṇࡢ⠊ᅖእ⨨ࡃࡇ㸦࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࡑࡢᚋ⠊ᅖෆ⨨ ࡁ࡞࠾ࡍࡇ㸧ࢆࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢ┠ⓗࡽࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢ᰿ᣐㄽ䭧ࡗ࡚᰿ᣐ࡙ ࡅࡿࡇࡣ࡛ࡁࡿࠋ59 Frederick Schauer, Codifying First Amendment: New York v. Ferber, 1982 SUP.CT.REV.285, 303 (1982). ࡞࠾ࠊࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡣࠊChaplinsky ௳ุỴࡀࠕᛮࡢ⾲᫂ࡗ࡚ࡢᐇ㉁ⓗ࡞せ⣲ࢆࡃᣢࡓ㸦࡞࠸㸧ࠖࠊ ࠕ┿ᐇࡢ฿㐩ࡗ࡚ࡢ♫ⓗ౯್ࢆࢃࡎࡋ᭷ࡉ࡞࠸ࠖゝཬࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡇࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࡑࡢࢃࡎ ࡞౯್ࡀࡢ┈ࡼࡗ࡚ࠕୖᅇࡽࢀࡿࠖࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡇࡘࡁࠊ⠊ᅖࡢၥ㢟ࡣ␗࡞ࡿࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ㸦at 303 n. 99㸧ࠋࡲࡓࠊࠕ⠊ᅖࡢእ࠶ࡿࡉࢀࡓఏ⤫ⓗࡢ≉ᚩࡣࠊ⠊ᅖࡀཬࡤ࡞࠸ࡇࡢุ᩿ࢆⓎゝࡑࢀ⮬య ࡢ᭷ࡍࡿ➨୍ಟṇࡢ౯್ࡢࡳᇶ࡙࠸࡚⾜࠺ࠖࡇࢁ࠶ࡿࡇࢁࠊFerber ௳ุỴࡢ⌮⏤࡙ࡅࡣࠊࠕゝㄽ ࡢ౯್ࡢၥ㢟ࢆᕞࡢつไ┈ࡢᙉࡉࡢၥ㢟ࡽ༊ศࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠖࡋ࡚ࠊࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡢၥ㢟┦㐪ࡍࡿⅬࡀ࠶ ࡿࡍࡿ㸦at 303-04㸧ࠋ 60 ๓ᥖὀ㸦56㸧ࡢᮏᩥཧ↷ࠋ 61 ๓ᥖὀ㸦37㸧ࡑࡢᮏᩥཧ↷ࠋ 62 Schauer, supra note 5, at 1781.
13 ゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢ᰿ᣐࡣࠊᵝࠎ࡞᭷ຊ࡞ぢゎࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ௦⾲ⓗࡣࠊ⮬ᕫ⤫ࡢ⌮ㄽ㸦self-government㸧ࠊẸⓗウ㆟ࡢ⌮ㄽ㸦democratic deliberation㸧ࠊ⮬ᕫ⾲⌧ࡢ⌮ㄽ㸦self-expression㸧ࠊಶேࡢ⮬ᚊ㸦personal autonomy㸧ࠊ┿ᐇⓎぢ㸦search for truth㸧ࠊᛮࡢ⮬ ⏤ᕷሙㄽ㸦marketplace of ideas㸧ࡀᣲࡆࡽࢀࡿࠋ ࡋࡋࠊᙼࡼࢀࡤࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢ⌮ㄽࡼࡗ࡚ࡶࠊ᪤Ꮡࡢゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࢆ୍㈏ࡋ ࡚ㄝ᫂ࡍࡿࡇࡣ࡛ࡁ࡞࠸63ࠋ ࡲࡎࠊ⮬ᕫ⤫ࡢ⌮ㄽࠊẸⓗウ㆟ࡢ⌮ㄽࡼࡗ࡚ࡣࠊᨻⓗ࡞ウ㆟ࠊ⮬ᕫ⤫㏻ᖖ 㛵ಀࡋ࡞࠸ࠊ࣏ࣝࣀࢢࣛࣇࠊၟᴗⓗゝㄽࠊⱁ⾡ⓗ⾲⌧ࡀゝㄽࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖෆࡉࢀࡿࡇ ࡢㄝ᫂ࡀᅔ㞴࡞ࡿࠋࠕᨻⓗ࡛࠶ࡿࠖ࠸࠺ᴫᛕࢆⷧࡵࡓព࡛⏝࠸ࢀࡤࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢゝㄽ ࡲ࡛➨୍ಟṇࢆཬࡰࡏࡿࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࠋࡋࡋࠊᙼࡼࢀࡤࠊࡑࢀ࡛ࡣᨻⓗゝㄽࢆ㠀 ᨻⓗゝㄽࡽ༊ศࡋ࡚๓⪅ࡼࡾᙉຊ࡞ಖㆤࢆ࠼ࡿࠊ⮬ᕫ⤫ࡢ⌮ㄽࠊẸⓗウ㆟ࡢ ⌮ㄽࡼࡿṇᙜࡢព⩏ࡀኻࢃࢀࡿ64ࠋ ḟࠊ┿ᐇⓎぢ࣭ᛮࡢ⮬⏤ᕷሙㄽࡼࡿሙྜࠊࠕ┿ᐇࠖࡣゝ࠸㞴࠸ࠊ⮬ᕫ⾲⌧ⓗ࡞ഃ 㠃ࡢᙉ࠸ゝㄽࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊⱁ⾡ࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊᩥᏛⓗ⾲⌧ࡸࠊ᫂ⓑ࡞㛫㐪࠸ࢆྵࡴゝㄽ➼ࡀ ゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖෆ⨨ࢀࡿࡇࡢㄝ᫂ࡀᅔ㞴࡞ࡿࠋ ࡲࡓࠊಶேࡢ⮬ᚊ࣭⮬ᕫ⾲⌧ࡢ⌮ㄽࡼࡿሙྜࠊἲேࡼࡿ㠀ၟᴗⓗ࡞ゝㄽ➨୍ಟṇ ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡀཬࡪࡇࡀㄝ࡛᫂ࡁ࡞࠸ࠋࡑࡢゝㄽࡼࡗ࡚ㄡࡢಶேࡢ⮬ᚊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ⮬ᕫ⾲ ⌧ࡀಁ㐍ࡉࢀࡿࡀ᫂ࡽ࡛࡞࠸ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡲࡓࠊಶேࡢ⮬ᚊࡶ⪅ຍᐖࡣཬࡤ࡞࠸ ࡓࡵࠊࠕ᫂ࡽ᭷ᐖ࡞ゝㄽࠖ65ࡣゝㄽࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖእ⨨ࢀ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸66ࠋ イ 第一修正の「磁力」 ௨ୖࡼࡾࠊࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡣࠊ᪤Ꮡࡢ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࢆ୍ࡘࡢ⌮ㄽࡽグ㏙ⓗㄝ᫂ࡍ ࡿࡇࡣࠊࡑࢀࡼࡗ࡚ㄝ࡛᫂ࡁ࡞࠸ゝㄽࡶࠕ⠊ᅖࠖྵࡲࢀࡿࡓࡵࠊᅔ㞴࡛࠶ࡿࡍ ࡿ67ࠋࡲࡓࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢ⌮ㄽࡼࡿከඖⓗ࡞ㄝ᫂ࡶࠊ᪤Ꮡࡢ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࢆグ㏙ⓗㄝ 63 Id. at 1785. 64 Id. 65 ࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘⮬㌟ࡣࠊ2004 ᖺㄽᩥ࠾࠸࡚ࠊࠕ᫂ࡽ᭷ᐖ࡞ゝㄽࠖࡢ୰㌟ࡘ࠸࡚ゝཬࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࡀࠊࡑࡢ ⴭ᭩࠾࠸࡚ࠊゝㄽࡀᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡋ࠺ࡿᐖᝏࡋ࡚ࠊࠕྡࡢẋᦆࠖࠊࠕ⮬ᑛᚰࡢẋᦆࠖࠊࠕࣉࣛࣂࢩ࣮ࡢᐖࠖࠊ ࠕᛌឤࠖࠊࠕ⢭⚄ⓗⱞ③ࠖࢆᣲࡆ࡚࠸ࡿ㸦SCHAUER, supra note 9, at 10㸧ࠋࡇࡇ࡛ࡢࠕ᫂ࡽ᭷ᐖ࡞ゝㄽࠖ
ࡶࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢᐖᝏࢆᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡍゝㄽࡢࡇࢆᣦࡍᛮࢃࢀࡿࠋ
66 ࡲࡓࠊಶேࡢ⮬ᚊ࣭⮬ᕫ⾲⌧ࡢ⌮ㄽࡼࡿሙྜࠊࠕ㏿ᗘไ㝈ᑐࡍࡿࠖࡢ࣓ࢵࢭ࣮ࢪࢆῧ࠼ࡓ㏿ᗘไ㝈 㐪ࡶ➨୍ಟṇࡢಖㆤࡀཬࡪࡇ࡞ࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸࠸࠺ᣦࡀ࠶ࡿ㸦Joseph Blocher, Nonsense and the Freedom of Speech: What Meaning Means for the First Amendment, 63 DUKE L.J. 1423, 1475 (2014)㸧ࠋ 67 Schauer, supra note 5, at 1786.
14 ᫂ࡍࡿࡇᙺ❧ࡓ࡞࠸ࠋࡇࢀࡽࡢ⌮ㄽࡀከᵝ㐣ࡂࠊࠕࡑࢀࡽࡢ⥲యࡼࡗ࡚♧ࡉࢀࡿ⠊ ᅖ㸦their collective coverage㸧ࠖࡀ࠶ࡲࡾᗈ࡞ࡶࡢ࡞ࡿࡽ࡛࠶ࡿ68ࠋ
᪤Ꮡࡢ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࢆ୍ࡘࡢ⌮ㄽࡽㄝ᫂ࡍࡿࡇࡀᅔ㞴࡛࠶ࡿ⌮⏤ࡋ࡚ࠊᙼ ࡣࠊ᭱㧗ุ࠾ࡅࡿ⌧ᐇࡢゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡀ➨୍ಟṇࡢ⫼ᚋ࠶ࡿᇶ♏⌮ㄽࡢ ࡳࡼࡗ࡚Ỵᐃࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊ➨୍ಟṇ㛵ࡍࡿᨻⓗ࣭♫Ꮫⓗ࣭Ṕྐⓗ࣭ᚰ ⌮Ꮫⓗ࣭⤒῭ⓗせᅉࡢᙳ㡪ࢆཷࡅ࡚࠾ࡾࠊࡘࠊࡑࢀࡽࡢᙳ㡪ຊࡀ➨୍ಟṇࡢᇶ♏⌮ㄽࡢ ᙳ㡪ຊࡼࡾࡶࡁ࠸ྍ⬟ᛶࢆᣦࡍࡿ69ࠋ ࡇࢀࡽࡢㅖせᅉࢆࠊᙼࡣࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢᣢࡘࠕ☢ຊ(magnetism)70ࠖ⾲⌧ࡍࡿࠋᙼࡼࢀ ࡤࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡣࠊ࣓ࣜ࢝♫࠾࠸࡚ࠊࠕࢩࣥ࣎ࣝ71ࠖⓗ࡞ᙺࢆᯝࡓࡍࠋࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊ ࣓ࣜ࢝࠾࠸࡚ゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡣࠊࡋࡤࡋࡤࠊ㔜せ࡞ࡢ┈⾪✺ࡋࡓሙྜ࡛ࡉ࠼ࡑࢀࢆ↓ どࡋࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࢆඃඛࡉࡏࡿࡢࡼ࠺ᢅࢃࢀࡿࠋࡑࡢࡓࡵࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡣࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬ ⏤࣭ฟ∧ࡢ⮬⏤ࢆᙇࡍࡿഃࢆඃ࡞ᆅ❧ࡓࡏࠊࡲࡓࠊ࿘ᅖࡢὀពࢆᘬࡁࡘࡅࡿࠋࡇ ࡢࡼ࠺࡞➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ☢ຊࠖࡼࡾࠊ➨୍ಟṇ౫ᣐࡍࡿࡇࡣࠊࣉࣞࢫࡢὀពᨭᣢࢆ ᘬࡁࡘࡅࡿ⤯ዲࡢᡭẁ࡞ࡿࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࣉࣞࢫࡀ࠶ࡿㄽⅬࢆබඹࡢ㛵ᚰ㡯ኚ࠶ࡓ ࡾ㔜せ࡞ᆅࢆ༨ࡵࡿࡓࡵࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢᙇࢆ⾜࠺ࡇࡣࠊ┈㞟ᅋࡗ࡚᭷ຠ࡞స ᡓ࡞ࡿࠋࡇࡢࡓࡵࠊ࠼ࡤࠊࡘ࡚⤒῭ⓗ⮬⏤ᑐࡍࡿつไ⪃࠼ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡓつไࡣࠊ ၟᴗⓗゝㄽ࠸࠺ࠊゝㄽᑐࡍࡿつไࡋ࡚ᙇࡉࢀࡿࡼ࠺࡞ࡾࠊࡘ࡚ᛶⓗ⮬⏤ࡢつ ไ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࣃࢱ࣮ࢼࣜࢬ࣒ᇶ࡙ࡃつไ⪃࠼ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡓࢾ࣮ࢻࢲࣥࢩࣥࢢࡢつไࡣࠊゝ ㄽつไ࡛࠶ࡿᙇࡉࢀࡿࡇ࡞ࡗࡓࠋ ᙼࡢ⌮ゎ࡛ࡣࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ☢ຊࠖࡀࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࢆࠊࡑࡢᇶ♏⌮ㄽࡢタᐃ ࡍࡿ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ᛮࢃࢀࡿቃ⏺⥺ࡼࡾࡶࠊእഃᢲࡋᣑࡆࠊࡑࢀࡲ࡛➨୍ಟṇࡢၥ㢟࡛࡞ ࠸⪃࠼ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡓၥ㢟ࢆゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖྵࡵࡿࠋࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊࠕ➨୍ಟṇࡢ☢ຊࡢ ᙉࡉࡣࠊࡑ࠺࡛࡞ࡅࢀࡤ➨୍ಟṇࡢቃ⏺⥺ࢆ㉺࠼࡚࠸ࡓ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺㢟ᙇࢆᘬࡁࡘࡅࠊ ࡑࢀࡼࡗ࡚ࠊッゴࡶࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢ☢ຊࡢᙉࡉࢆࡼࡾᙉࡍࡿࠊࣉࣞࢫࠊබ⾗ࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊ ┈㞟ᅋࡢ࠶ࡿ⛬ᗘࡢ㛵ᚰࢆᘬࡁࡘࡅࡿࠋࡇࡢࢧࢡࣝࡣࠊ௨๓ࡣ➨୍ಟṇࡢ㡿ᇦࡢእഃ ࠶ࡗࡓㄽⅬࢆࡑࡢෆഃᘬࡁ㎸ࡴࡔࢁ࠺72ࠖࠋ ྠࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡣࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢ⌧ᐇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡀ⊃ࡃ࡞ࡾࠊ౯್ࡢㄆࡵࡽࢀࡿゝㄽࡲ
68 Id. See also Tabatha Abu El-Haj, “Live Free or Die”-Liberty and the First Amendment, 78 OHIO ST.L.J. 917, 925 (2017).
69 Schauer, supra note 5, at 1768, 1787-1800. 70 Id. at 1787.
71 Id.
72 Schauer, supra note 5, at 1796; Shanor, supra note 18, at 330.
15 ࡛㏣࠸ฟࡍࡼ࠺࡞ࡇࡣ࡞࠸⌮ゎࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡼ࠺࡛࠶ࡿࠋ᭣ࡃࠊࠕࡋࡋࠊࡇࢀ[➨୍ಟṇ ࡢࠗ☢ຊ࠘㸸ᘬ⏝⪅]ᑐᛂࡍࡿࠊ௨๓ࡽෆഃ࠶ࡗࡓㄽⅬࢆእഃ㏣࠸ࡸࡿຊࡣ࡞ࢇ ࡽᏑᅾࡋ࡞࠸73ࠖࠋ ウ 小括 ௨ୖࡽࠊࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡼࢀࡤࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡣࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢ౯್ࢆྵࡴྰ ࠸࠺ほⅬࡽᇶᮏⓗỴᐃࡉࢀࡿࠋࡋࡋࠊุἲ⌮࠾ࡅࡿ᪤Ꮡࡢࠕ⠊ᅖ୍ࠖ⮴ ࡍࡿᇶ♏⌮ㄽࡣᏑᅾࡋ࡞࠸ࠋࡓࡔࡋࠊᙼࡀ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ☢ຊࠖࡪࡶࡢࡼࡗ࡚ࠊࡑࡢ ⫼ᚋ࠶ࡿᇶ♏⌮ㄽࡢ౯್ࡀཬࡤ࡞࠸ゝㄽࡀࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖෆࡉࢀࡿࡇࡣ࠶ࡾ ࠺ࡿࠋ ᙼࡢ⌮ゎࡣࠊࡢㄽ⪅ࡶᣦࡍࡿゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢᣑᙇഴྥ74ᩚྜⓗ࠸࠼ࡿࠋࡋࡋࠊ ࡑࢀྠࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤㛵ࡍࡿ᪤Ꮡࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࢆ➨୍ಟṇࡢ┠ⓗࡽ⏬ᐃࡍࡿࡇࡢ ᅔ㞴ᛶࡶ᫂ࡽࡋ࡚ࡋࡲࡗࡓ75ࠋ (2)規範による見解-シュノアーの見解- ア 規範と言論効果について ࡇࢀᑐࡋ࡚ࢩࣗࣀ࣮ࡢぢゎࡢ≉ᚩࡣࠊࠕศᯒⓗ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣဴᏛⓗཎ⌮ࡼࡗ࡚➨୍ಟ ṇࡢᑕ⛬ࡢṇᙜࢆヨࡳࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࡴࡋࢁࠊ♫Ꮫⓗ⌧㇟ࡋ࡚⠊ᅖࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࡍ ࡿ76ࠖⅬ࠶ࡿࠋ ࡲࡎࠊᙼዪࡶࠊุἲ⌮࠾ࡅࡿゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡀᅛᐃⓗ࡞ࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊၟᴗⓗゝㄽࡢࡼ ࠺ࠊࡘ࡚ࡣ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖእ࠶ࡗࡓࡶࡢࡀࠊᚋࠕ⠊ᅖࠖෆ࠶ࡿኚ᭦ࡉࢀ ࡿࡇࡀ࠶ࡿࡇࢆㄆࡵࡿ77ࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࡑࡢ⌮⏤ࡣࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡀࠕ♫ⓗ⾜Ⅽ࠾ ࡼࡧࡑࢀࡽࡢព㛵ࡍࡿࠊඹ᭷ࡉࢀࡓᩥⓗつ⠊㸦norms㸧ࢆᫎࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ ࡘࠊࡑࢀࡽࡢつ⠊࠾ࡼࡧពࡣ♫ⓗ࡞ᙳ㡪ຊ㸦forces㸧ᇶ࡙࠸࡚ኚࡋ࠺ࡿ78ࠖࡇࢁ ࠶ࡿࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊุἲ⌮࠾ࡅࡿゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࢆࠊࠕゝㄽຠᯝ㸦speech effect㸧
73 Schauer, supra note 5, at 1796.
74 ๓ᥖὀ㸦24㸧ࡑࡢᮏᩥཧ↷ࠋ࡞࠾ࠊࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡣࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢ⠊ᅖࡢᣑᙇࡀ⏕ࡌࡿ⌮⏤ࡋ࡚ࠊ➨୍ಟ ṇࡢᩥゝࡢᗈ⠊ࡉࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢ┠ⓗࡢ☜ᐃᛶࠊ㏻ᖖࡢព࡛ࡢࠕゝㄽࠖࡢ㐢ᅾ࡞ࡽࠊ➨୍ಟṇᇶ࡙ ࡃᙇࢆㄝᚓⓗ࡛࡞࠸ࡋ࡚⡆༢㏥ࡅࡿࡇࡀ㞴ࡋ࠸ࡇࢆᣲࡆࡿ㸦Schauer, supra note 5, at 1797-98㸧ࠋ 75 See Frederick Schauer, The Politics and Incentives of First Amendment Coverage, 56 WM.&MARY L.
REV.1613, 1617 (2015); Schauer 1989 at13; Kendrick, supra note 58, at 1218; Blocher, supra note 66, at 1475.
76 Shanor, supra note 18, at 343. 77 Id. at 321.
78 Id. at 338.
16 79ࠖ࠸࠺ᴫᛕࢆ⏝࠸࡚ㄝ᫂ࡍࡿࠋࡇࢀࡼࢀࡤࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡣࠊࠕఱࡀࠗゝㄽ࠘ ࢆᵓᡂࡍࡿࡢࡘ࠸࡚ࡢඹ᭷ࡉࢀࡓつ⠊ࠖᇶ࡙࠸࡚⏬ᐃࡉࢀࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࠕၥ㢟࡞ ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿ⾜Ⅽࡢ♫ⓗ࡞ពࡋ࡚ᮇᚅࡉࢀࡿࡶࡢࠊ࠾ࡼࡧࠊࡑࢀᑐࡍࡿࣜࢡࢩࣙࣥ ࡋ࡚ᮇᚅࡉࢀࡿࡶࡢ㸦ヰ⪅ࡀ⪺ࡁᡭࡲࡓࡣ⫈⾗ࡢែᗘࡢࡼ࠺స⏝ࡍࡿࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ ࡣࠊ⪺ࡁᡭࡲࡓࡣ⫈⾗ࢆࡢࡼ࠺ᐖࡍࡿࡢࢆྵࡴ㸧ࡢ⤖ྜࠖࡼࡗ࡚ࠊࡘࡲࡾࠊࠕ⾲⌧ ⓗ⾜Ⅽࡀࡑࡢ♫ⓗᩥ⬦࠾࠸࡚ࠊࡢࡼ࠺ᶵ⬟ࡍࡿ㸦work㸧ࡢࠊ࠾ࡼࡧࠊ࡞ࢇࡽ ࡢຠᯝࡀ࠶ࡿࡋ࡚ࡑࢀࡀࡢ⛬ᗘ࠶ࡾ࠺ࡿࡢᑐࡍࡿ♫ⓗุ᩿ࡢ㏻⏝ຊ㸦strength㸧ࠖ ࡼࡗ࡚⏬ᐃࡉࢀࡿ80ࠋලయⓗࡣࠊࠕᙜヱ⾜Ⅽࡢ♫ⓗຠᯝᑐࡍࡿඹ㏻ࡢつ⠊ࡀᏑᅾࡍ ࡿሙྜࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊุᡤࡀࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞つ⠊ࡀᏑᅾࡍࡁ࡛࠶ࡿุ᩿ࡋࡓሙྜࠊࡑࡇ ࡣ➨୍ಟṇࡣཬࡤ࡞࠸ࠋ㏫ࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ඹ㏻ࡢつ⠊ࡀᏑᅾࡋ࡞࠸ࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊุᡤࡀ ࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞つ⠊ࡀᏑᅾࡋ࡞࠸ࡍࡁࡔุ᩿ࡋࡓሙྜࡣࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡀཬࡪ81ࠖࠋ イ 言論効果による区分
࠼ࡤࠊSchenck v. United States௳ุỴ࡛ࡣࠊᚩරไᑐࡍࡁ࡛࠶ࡿᙇࡍࡿ ࣮ࣜࣇࣞࢵࢺࢆᚩරೃ⿵⪅㓄ᕸࡋࡓ⾜Ⅽࡘࡁࠊ㜵ㅁἲࢆ㐺⏝ࡍࡿࡇࡀ➨୍ಟṇ ࡋ࡞࠸ุ᩿ࡉࢀࡓࠋࡇࡢุỴࡣࠊ࣮࣒࣍ࢬุᐁࡢࠕ᫂ⓑࡘ⌧ᅾࡢ༴㝤ࠖ࠸࠺ࣇࣞ ࣮ࢬ࡛▱ࡽࢀࡿࡀࠊ࣮࣒࣍ࢬࡣࠊྠࠊࠕࡶࡕࢁࢇࠊࡑࡢᩥ᭩ࡣࠊఱࡽࡢຠᯝࢆᣢࡘࡇ ࢆពᅗࡉࢀ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ㓄ᕸࡉࢀ࡞ࡗࡓ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊᡃࠎࡣࠊᚩරไࡢᐇࡢጉᐖ ࢆᚩරᑐ㇟⪅ಁࡍࡇ௨እࠊࡇࡢᩥ᭩ࡼࡗ࡚ᚩරࡢᑐ㇟⪅ࡢࡼ࠺࡞ᙳ㡪ࢆ࠼ ࡿࡇࢆពᅗࡋ࡚࠸ࡓࡢࢆぢฟࡍࡇࡣ࡛ࡁ࡞࠸ࠋ࣭࣭࣭ゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࢆ᭱ࡶཝ᱁ಖㆤࡋ ࡓࡋ࡚ࡶࠊ࣭࣭࣭ຊࡢ⾜ࡋ࡚ࡢຠᯝ㸦effect of force㸧ࡋ᭷ࡉ࡞࠸ゝⴥࢆⓎࡍࡿࡇ ࡢᕪࡋṆࡵࡽேࢆಖㆤࡍࡿࡇࡣ࡞࠸82ࠖ㏙ࡓࠋࢩࣗࣀ࣮ࡼࢀࡤࠊࡇࡇ࡛ࡢ㆟ ㄽࡣࠊゝㄽຠᯝ㛵ࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊࡘࠊุᡤࡣࠊ࣮ࣜࣇࣞࢵࢺࡢ㓄ᕸࠊ ࡇࢀࢆ┠ࡋࡓࡶࡢࡼࡿᚩරไࡢጉᐖࡢ㛫ࡢᅉᯝ㛵ಀࡀࠊࡑࢀゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࢆཬࡰࡉ ࡞࠸ࡍࡿ༑ศ࡞᫂ࡽ㸦sufficiently clear㸧࡛࠶ࡿㄆࡵࡽࢀࡿุ᩿ࡋࡓࡓࡵ ࠊᙜヱ࣮ࣜࣇࣞࢵࢺࡢ㓄ᕸࡣ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖእ⨨ࢀࡓ83ࠋ ྠࡌࡃࠊࢃ࠸ࡏࡘ⾲⌧㛵ࡋ࡚ࡶࠊ๓㏙ࡋࡓ࣑࣮ࣛᇶ‽ࡣࠊࠕᖹᆒேࡀ⌧ᅾࡢඹྠయࡢᇶ 79 Id. at 344. 80 Id. at 344-45. 81 Id. at 346. 82 249 U.S. 47, 51 (1919). 83 Shanor, supra note 18, at 347.
17 ‽ࢆ㐺⏝ࡋࡓሙྜࠖࡢุ᩿ࢆၥ㢟ࡋ࡚࠸ࡓࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࠕඹྠయࡢᇶ‽ࠖࡘࡁࠊุỴࡣࠊ ࠕᅜᐙࡢ᠇ἲ࠾࠸࡚ࠊᕞࡢᶒ㝈ᑐࡍࡿᇶᮏⓗ࡞➨୍ಟṇࡢไ㝈ࡣࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢸࡈ ኚࢃࡿࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࡋࡋࠊࡇࡢࡇࡣࠊఱࡀ͆ዲⰍⓗ࡞⯆͇ッ࠼ࡅࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ ࡿࡢࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊఱࡀ͆᫂ࡽᛌ͇࡛࠶ࡿࡢࢆ᫂☜ࡍࡿࠊ☜❧ࡋࡓᅜᐙඹ㏻ ࡢᇶ‽ࡀᏑᅾࡋࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊᏑᅾࡍࡁࠊᏑᅾࡋ࠺ࡿࡇࡲ࡛ពࡋ࡞࠸ࠋ࣭࣭࣭ᡃࠎࡢᅜ ᐙࡣࠊ༢⣧ࡁࡍࡂࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊከᵝ㐣ࡂࡿࠋࡑࢀࡺ࠼ࠊᚲ㡲ࡢࢥࣥࢭࣥࢧࢫࡀᏑᅾ ࡍࡿᐃࡋࡓሙྜ࠾࠸࡚ࡍࡽࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ᇶ‽ࢆࠊ୍ࡘࡢᐃᘧ࠸࠺ᙧ࡛ࠊ50ࡢᕞ ࡚♧ࡍࡇࢆุᡤᑐࡋ࡚ྜ⌮ⓗᮇᚅࡍࡿࡇࡣ࡛ࡁ࡞࠸84ࠖࡋ࡚ࠊᅜᐙయ ࡢᇶ‽࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࡼࡾ࣮ࣟ࢝ࣝ࡞ᇶ‽ࢆពࡍࡿࡇࢆ᫂ࡽࡋࡓࠋࡇࡇࡽࠊࢃ࠸ࡏ ࡘ㛵ࡍࡿἲ⌮ࡣࠊዲⰍᛶ࣭ᛌឤ㛵ࡍࡿつ⠊ࡀࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢸࡈ␗࡞ࡿࡇࢆ๓ᥦ ࡋ࡚ࠊࡼࡾ࣮ࣟ࢝ࣝ࡞ࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢸࡢᇶ‽ࢆಖㆤࡍࡿࡶࡢࡔࡍࡿ85ࠋᅜᐙⓗ࡞つ⠊ࡢ Ꮡᅾࢆ☜ಙࡍࡿࡇࡣᅔ㞴࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࡶࠊࡼࡾ࣮ࣟ࢝ࣝ࡞つ⠊࡛࠶ࢀࡤࡑࡢᏑᅾࢆ☜ಙࡍࡿ ࡇࡀ࡛ࡁࡿࡓࡵࠊุᡤࡣࠊඹ㏻ࡢつ⠊ࡀᡂ❧ࡍࡿࡋ࡚ࠊࢃ࠸ࡏࡘ⾲⌧ࢆࠕ⠊ᅖࠖእ ࠾࠸ࡓ࠸࠺ព࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ࠋ ࡶᙼዪࡣࠊዎ⣙࣭ඹㅛ➼ࡢ⣙᮰࠸࠺♫ⓗ㛵ಀᛶࡶࠊつ⠊↷ࡽࡋ࡚➨୍ಟṇࡢ ࠕ⠊ᅖࠖእ⨨ࢀࡓࡶࡢࡔࡍࡿ86ࠋዎ⣙࣭ඹㅛ࠾࠸࡚ࡶࠊࡑࡢ♫㛵ಀධࡗࡓᙜ ⪅㛫࡛ࠊⓎヰ⪅ࡀఱࢆពᅗࡋ࡚࠾ࡾࠊᐇ㝿ఱࢆ࡞ࡍࡁ࡞ࡢࡘࡁࠊゝㄽຠᯝࡢつ⠊ ࡣ༑ศᙉᅛᡂ❧ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ ࡇࢀᑐࡋ࡚ࠊ࠼ࡤࠊᨻⓗゝㄽ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡀཬࡪࡢࡣࠊ࠶ࡿᨻⓗゝㄽ ࡀⓎࡏࡽࢀࡓሙྜࠊࡑࡢ⪺ࡁᡭࡣࠊ␗࡞ࡿつ⠊ࢆ᭷ࡍࡿᵝࠎ࡞ゎ㔘ඹྠయᒓࡍࡿࡢ࡛࠶ ࡗ࡚ࠊ⪺ࡁᡭࡢ㈶ྰࡣண ࡛ࡁࡎࠊᙜヱゝㄽᑐࡍࡿඹ㏻ࡢつ⠊ࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࡣゝ࠼࡞࠸ ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿ87ࠋྠᵝࠊ࣏ࣝࣀࢢࣛࣇ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡀཬࡪࡢࡣࠊࡑࢀࡼࡿᐖᝏ ࡘࡁࠊඹ㏻ࡢつ⠊ࡀᡂ❧ࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࡇᇶ࡙ࡃࠋࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊ࣏ࣝࣀࢢࣛࣇᑐࡋࠊ ࠕࡑࢀࡣᚑᒓࢆពࡍࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊ༢ᛶᕪࡢ㐺ษ࡞ㄆ㆑࡛࠶ࡿࠖ࠸࠺㸦≉⏨ᛶഃ 84 Miller, 413 U.S. at 30. 85 Shanor, supra note 18, at 348.
86 Id. at 349.ࢩࣗࣀ࣮ࡣࡶࠊุᡤ࣭Ꮫᰯ࣭᐀ᩍ࣭㌷㝲࣭ฮタࠊ࠾ࡼࡧࠊ⫋ሙ࡞ࢆࠕ⊂⮬ࡢ⛛ ᗎ࡙ࡅࡽࢀࡓつ⠊ࠖࢆ᭷ࡍࡿࡶࡢࡋ࡚ᣲࡆࡿࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࡑࡢ୰࠾࠸࡚ࡣࠊ㏻ᖖࡢពࡢゝㄽࡼࡿ ሗఏ㐩ࡢつไ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࡶࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢၥ㢟ࡋ࡚┿㠃┠ྲྀࡾୖࡆࡽࢀ࡚ࡇ࡞ࡗࡓゝㄽࡀᏑᅾࡋ࠺ࡿࠋ ࠼ࡤࠊࢭࢡࢩࣕࣝࣁࣛࢫ࣓ࣥࢺࡢつไࡣࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢၥ㢟ࡋ࡚ྲྀࡾୖࡆࡽࢀ࡚ࡇ࡞ࡗࡓࠋࡑࢀࡣᙼ ዪࡼࢀࡤࠊ⫋ሙࡣࠊࠕ⌧௦ࡢ⫋ሙࡩࡉࢃࡋ࠸つ⠊ᐇ㊶ࡼࡗ࡚ᨭ㓄ࡉࢀࡿࡁ✵㛫ࠖ࡞ࡢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ ࠕࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞✵㛫ࡗ࡚ࠊࣁࣛࢫ࣓ࣥࢺࡣ㐺ษࠊࡘࠊ㸦つ⠊ࡢ㸸ᘬ⏝⪅㸧ᔂቯᐖᝏࢆᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡍࡶ ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠖࡽ࡛࠶ࡿ㸦at 357㸧ࠋ 87 Id. at 351. 䠉㻌㻌㻞㻢㻣㻌䠉
18 ࡢ㸧ࣜࢡࢩࣙࣥࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿ୍᪉࡛ࠊ᪉ࠊࠕࡑࢀࢆぢࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࡑࢀࡢ⏕ࡳฟࡍຠᯝࡢ୰࡛ ⏕ࡁ࡚࠸ࡃࠖ࠸࠺㸦ዪᛶࡢ㸧ࣜࢡࢩࣙࣥࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿ88ࠋࡑࡢࡓࡵࠊࠕ࣏ࣝࣀࢢࣛࣇ ࡢຠᯝᑐࡋ␗࡞ࡿホ౯ࢆୗࡋࠊࡲࡓࠊࡑࡢࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢸࡢᵓᡂဨࡀ␗࡞ࡗࡓ♫ⓗ❧ሙ ࠶ࡿࡓࡵࠊࡑࢀࡀఱ࡛࠶ࡿ㛵ࡋ␗࡞ࡗࡓ⌮ゎࢆࡍࡿከඖⓗ࡞ゎ㔘ࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢸࡀ Ꮡᅾࡍࡿ89ࠖࡇ࡞ࡾࠊ࣏ࣝࣀࢢࣛࣇࡢゝㄽຠᯝࡘࡁඹ㏻ࡢつ⠊ࡣᏑᅾࡋ࡞࠸ࠋ ウ 小括 ௨ୖࡢࡼ࠺ࠊࢩࣗࣀ࣮ࡢぢゎ࠾࠸࡚ࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡣࠊゝㄽࡢ౯್ࡼ ࡗ࡚࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊඹ㏻ࡢつ⠊ࡢᏑྰࡼࡗ࡚Ỵࡏࡽࢀࡿࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࢃ࠸ࡏࡘ⾲⌧つไ㛵ࡍ ࡿ࣑࣮ࣛᇶ‽ࡘ࠸࡚ࡢ㆟ㄽࡀ♧ࡋࡓࡼ࠺ࠊࡑࢀࡀࠕ♫ⓗᩥ⬦ࠖ࠾ࡅࡿඹ㏻ࡢつ⠊ ࡢᏑྰࢆၥ㢟ࡍࡿࡀࡓࡵࠊつ⠊ࡣࠊᅜᐙⓗ࡞ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿᚲせࡣᚲࡎࡋࡶ࡞ࡃࠊࡼࡾ ࣮ࣟ࢝ࣝ࡞ࡶࡢ࡛ࡶ㊊ࡾࡿࡉࢀࡿࠋࡇࡢⅬࢩࣗࣀ࣮ࡢ㆟ㄽࡢ≉ᚩࡀ࠶ࡿ࠸࠼ࡼ࠺ࠋ ࡋࡋࠊࡇࡢඹ㏻ࡢつ⠊ࡢᏑྰࡀ୍యఱࢆពࡍࡿࡢࡣᚲࡎࡋࡶ᫂ࡽ࡛࡞࠸ࠋᙼዪ ࡼࢀࡤࠊSchenck௳ุỴࡢゝㄽࡀ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖእࡉࢀࡓࡢࡣࠊ࣮ࣜࣇࣞࢵࢺ ᚩරไࡢጉᐖࡢ㛫ᅉᯝ㛵ಀࡢ᫂ⓑᛶࡀㄆࡵࡽࢀࡓࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡲࡓࠊࢃ࠸ࡏࡘ⾲⌧ ࡀࠕ⠊ᅖࠖእࡉࢀࡓࡢࡣࠊ࠸ࢃࡤ㸺ࡑࡢࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢸ࠾ࡅࡿㄡࡶࡀぢࡓࡃ࡞࠸ࡶࡢ㸼 ࡀ☜❧ࡋ࡚࠸ࡓࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡇ࡛ࡣࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞⾲⌧ࢆࠕ⠊ᅖࠖእ࠾ࡅࡤࠊ㸺ぢࡓࡃ ࡞࠸ࡶࡢࡢ┈㸼ࡀ༑ศ☜ಖࡉࢀࡿ㛵ಀࡀᡂ❧ࡋ࡚࠸ࡓࠋዎ⣙࣭ඹㅛࡘ࠸࡚ࡶྠᵝࠊ ዎ⣙㐪ࢧࣥࢡࢩࣙࣥࢆㄢࡍࡇࡣ㈈⏘⛛ᗎࡢಖㆤ┤᥋ࡘ࡞ࡀࡾࠊࡲࡓࠊඹㅛࡢฎ⨩ ࡣಖㆤἲ┈ࡢ☜ಖ┤᥋ࡘ࡞ࡀࡿࠋࡇࢀᑐࡋ࡚ࠊ࣏ࣝࣀࢢࣛࣇ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ ࡀཬࡪࡢࡣࠊࡑࢀࡀዪᛶࡢᚑᒓࢆᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡍ࠸࠺㛵ಀࡘࡁࠊ㆟ㄽࡀṧࡿࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ ࡋࡋࠊࡇࢀ࡛ࡣᙼዪࡢ࠸࠺ඹ㏻ࡢつ⠊ࡣࠊᐖᝏࡢ᫂ⓑᛶࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊつไ┈つไ ᑐ㇟ࡓࡿ⾲⌧≀ࡢᅉᯝ㛵ಀࡢ᫂ⓑᛶࡢせồ90ࡢゝ࠸࠼㐣ࡂ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ (3)「市民」の権利-バグワットの見解- ⥆࠸࡚ࠊࣂࢢ࣡ࢵࢺࡢぢゎࢆぢ࡚࠸ࡇ࠺ࠋᙼࡢぢゎࡢ≉ᚩࡣࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࢆ➨୍ಟṇࡢಖ 㞀ࡍࡿࡢ⮬⏤㛵㐃࡙ࡅ࡚⌮ゎࡍࡿࡇࢆヨࡳࡿⅬ࠶ࡿࠋ 88 Id. at 352. 89 Id.
90 Brown v. EMA, 564 U.S. 786 (2011) (ᭀຊⓗࣅࢹ࢜ࢤ࣮࣒ᖺᑡ⪅ࡢᐖᝏࡢ㛫ࠕᅉᯝ㛵ಀࡢドᣐࠖࢆ せồࡋࡓ).ࡓࡔࡋࠊࢩࣗࣀ࣮ࡢ㆟ㄽࡣࠊドᣐࡢせồ࠸࠺ࡼࡾࡣゎ㔘ࡢၥ㢟ࡋ࡚ࡢഃ㠃ࡀᙉ࠸ࠋࡋࡓࡀ ࡗ࡚ࠊࡇࡢⅬ࠾࠸࡚ࠊᅉᯝ㛵ಀࡢ᫂ⓑᛶࡢせồ␗࡞ࡿ⤖ㄽࡀᑟࢀࡿࡇࡣ࠶ࡾ࠺ࡿࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࠋ
19 ア 民主主義的権利について ➨୍ಟṇࡣࠊ࠸ࡃࡘࡢ⮬⏤ࢆᥖࡆࡿࠋゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠊฟ∧ࡢ⮬⏤ࠊ㞟ࡢ⮬⏤ࠊㄳ㢪ᶒ 㸦Ẹ⩏ⓗᶒ㸸democratic rights㸧ࠊ᐀ᩍ᮲㡯࡛࠶ࡿࠋᙼࡼࢀࡤࠊࡇࢀࡽࡣࠊ㸦ไᐃ ≉Ṧ࡞㐣⛬ࢆ⤒࡚➨୍ಟṇᣢࡕ㎸ࡲࢀࡓ᐀ᩍ᮲㡯ࢆ㝖ࡁ91ࠊ㸧┦㛵㐃࡙ࡅࡽࢀ࡚ ࡁࡓ92ࠋࡑࢀࡺ࠼ࠊẸ⩏ⓗᶒࡣࠊඹ㏻ࡢ㉳※࣭┠ⓗࢆ᭷ࡍࡿࠕྠ✀ࡢ㸦cognate㸧93ࠖ ᶒ࡛࠶ࡿ94ࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊᙼࡣࠊࠕゝㄽࠖࡢᐃ⩏࠸࠺సᴗࡣࠊࡢẸ⩏ⓗᶒࡢ 㛵ಀࢆ⪃៖ࡋ࡚⾜ࢃࢀ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࡇࢆ㆟ㄽࡢฟⓎⅬࡍࡿࠋ ࡑࡋ࡚ࠊᙼࡼࢀࡤࠊฟ∧ࡢ⮬⏤࣭㞟ࡢ⮬⏤࣭ㄳ㢪ᶒࡣࠊࡑࡢ≉ᚩࡋ࡚ࠊձ」ᩘࡢ యࡽ࡞ࡿඹྠࡢάື࡛࠶ࡿࡇࠊղࡑࢀࡽࡢయᑐࡍࡿ⾲⌧ⓗせ⣲ࢆᣢࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࡇ ࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊ᭱ࡶ㔜せ࡞≉ᚩࡋ࡚ࠊճẸ⩏࠾ࡅࡿᕷẸ࠸࠺ᆅᙉࡃ⤖ࡧࡘࡅ ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿ࠸࠺Ⅼ࡛ᨻⓗ࡞ᛶ᱁ࢆ᭷ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡇࢆඹ᭷ࡍࡿ95ࠋࡇࡇࡽࠊᙼࡣࠊ➨ ୍ಟṇࡼࡗ࡚ಖㆤࡉࢀࡿゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡶࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢࠕྠ✀ࡢࠖᶒྠᵝࠊࠕᨻⓗ࠶ࡿ࠸ ࡣẸ⩏ⓗ࡞ඹྠࡢάືᚑࡍࡿᶒࠖࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊࠕẸ⩏࠾ࡅࡿᕷẸࡋ࡚ࡢ ㈨᱁࡛ࠊ⪅ࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮ࢺࡍࡿᶒ96ࠖ⌮ゎࡍࡿࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊᙼࡢ⌮ゎ࠾࠸࡚ࠊ ࠕゝㄽࡢ୰ᚰⓗᶵ⬟ࡣࠊᨻⓗᛮࢆᗈࡵࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊᨻⓗ㐠ືࢆィ⏬ࡍࡿࡇ࡛࠶ࡿ97ࠖࠋ イ 「市民」の概念について ࡓࡔࡋࠊᙼࡢ࠸࠺ࠕᨻⓗࠖࡣࠕ㑅ᣲ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣබඹⓗᨻ⟇ၥ㢟┤᥋㛵㐃ࡍࡿゝㄽࠖ ࡢࡳࢆྵࡴࠊ⊃࠸ࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋᙼࡢ⌮ゎ࠾ࡅࡿゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡣࠊ࠶ࡃࡲ࡛ࠊࠕẸ⩏ ࠾ࡅࡿᕷẸࡋ࡚ࡢ㈨᱁ࠖ⤖ࡧࡘࡃࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊࡑࡶࡑࡶࠊ࣓ࣜ࢝᠇ἲࡀ᥇⏝ࡍࡿ௦ ⾲Ẹไ࠾ࡅࡿࠕᕷẸࠖࣔࢹࣝࡋ࡚ࡣࠊࡘࡢࡶࡢࡀ࠶ࡾ࠺ࡿࠋࣇ࢙ࢹࣛࣜࢫࢺࣔࢹ ࣝඹඪࣔࢹ࡛ࣝ࠶ࡿ98ࠋࡇࡢࡘࡢࣔࢹࣝࡢᑐ❧Ⅼࡣࠊᢞ⚊࠸࠺༢⊂࡛ࡢ⾜ືࢆ㝖 91 1791 ᖺ➨୍ಟṇࢆᡂ❧ࡉࡏࡓ㉳ⲡ⪅ࡓࡕࡣࠊ➨୍ಟṇᥖࡆࡽࢀࡿࡢ⮬⏤᐀ᩍ᮲㡯ࡣࡃ␗࡞ࡿ ࡶࡢࡔ⪃࠼࡚࠸ࡓࠋࠕᐇ㝿ࠊ᐀ᩍ᮲㡯ࡣࠊ1789 ᖺ 9 ᭶ 9 ᪥ࠊ㉳ⲡ㐣⛬ࡢࢠࣜࢠࣜୖ㝔ࡀㄝ᫂࡞ࡋ⤖ ࡧࡘࡅࡿࡲ࡛ࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢṧࡾࡢࡶࡢ⤖ࡧࡘࡅࡽࢀ࡚࠸࡞ࡗࡓࠖ㸦Bhagwat, supra note 2, at 872㸧ࠋࡇ ࢀᑐࡋ࡚ࠊẸ⩏ⓗᶒࡣ㉳ⲡ㐣⛬ࡢึᮇࡽ㛵㐃ࡍࡿࡶࡢࡋ࡚ᢅࢃࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋSee also Ashutosh Bhagwat, Religious Associations: Hosanna-Tabor and the Instrumental Value of Religious Group, 92 WASH.U.L.REV. 73, 92-93 (2014).
92 Bhagwat, supra note 2, at 872
93 See Thomas v. Collins, 323 U.S. 516, 530 (1945); De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353, 364 (1937). 94 Bhagwat, supra note 2, at 873.
95 Id. at 873. ࡞࠾ࠊ㞟ࡢ⮬⏤ࡢᨻⓗᛶ᱁ࡘࡁࠊࣂࢢ࣡ࢵࢺࡣࠊ㞟ࡢ⮬⏤ᑐࡍࡿ࣓ࢯࣥࠊ࣐ࢹ ࢯࣥࡢᥦ⌮⏤࠾ࡅࡿ࢜ࣜࢪࢼࣝࡢᩥゝࡀࠊࠕබඹၿࢆồࡵ࡚ඹᖹⓗ㞟ࡍࡿࠖᶒ࡛࠶ࡗࡓࡇ ࢆᣦࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ
96 Id. at 874. 97 Id.
98 Ashutosh Bhagwat, The Democratic First Amendment, 110 NW.U.L.REV. 1097, 1121 (2016).
20 ࡅࡤࠊ㞟ᅋࡋ࡚ࡢࡳࠊࡑࡢᨻⓗ㈨᱁ࢆⓎࡍࡿࡣࡎࡢᕷẸࡘ࠸࡚99ࠊࠕᕷẸࡢ⚾ⓗ㞟
ᅋ㸦private group of citizens㸧100ࠖࡢᏑᅾࢆほᛕ࡛ࡁࡿ࠸࠺Ⅼ࠶ࡿࠋ
ࣇ࢙ࢹࣛࣜࢫࢺࣔࢹࣝࡼࢀࡤࠊ௦⾲Ẹไ࠾࠸࡚ࠊࠕᕷẸࡢ⚾ⓗ㞟ᅋࠖࡣᏑᅾࡋ࡞࠸ࠋ ࡇࡢࣔࢹࣝ࠾࠸࡚ࠊᕷẸࡣࡑࡢ௦⾲ࢆࠊᙼࡽ⮬㌟ࡢ⬟ຊࡼࡗ࡚㑅ฟࡍࡿࠋࡋࡋࠊ୍ ᗘ௦⾲⪅ࢆ㑅ฟࡋࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࢀࡤࠊ௦⾲⪅ᑐࡍࡿᢈุࢆྵࡴࠊබඹ㛵ࡍࡿウ㆟ࡣ௦⾲⪅ ጤࡡࡽࢀࠊࡓࡔࠊ௦⾲⪅ࡢࡳࡀேẸࡢࡓࡵㄒࡾ࠺ࡿࡇ࡞ࡿࠋ⤖ᯝࡋ࡚ࠊᨻⓗ ㄽⅬࡘ࠸࡚⤯࠼ࡎ㆟ㄽࢆ⥆ࡅࡿࠕᕷẸࡢ⚾ⓗ㞟ᅋࠖࡣṇᙜࡉࢀ࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡢࣔࢹ࡛ࣝࡣࠊ ➨୍ಟṇࡢᶒ࠼ࡽࢀࡿᙺࡣࠊ㠀ᖖ㝈ᐃࡉࢀࡿ101ࠋ௦⾲⪅ᑐࡍࡿᢈุࡸ❧ἲ ᑐࡍࡿ㆟ㄽࡉ࠼ࠊᕷẸ࣭ࣉࣞࢫࡣᮇᚅࡉࢀ࡞࠸ࠋࠕᜏᖖⓗ࡞ᕷẸࡼࡿ⤌⧊ࠊᑡ࡞ࡃࡶࠊ ᨻⓗㄽⅬྥࡅࡽࢀࡓ⤌⧊ࡣࠊேẸࡢ௦⾲࡛࠶ࡿ㑅ᣲࡉࢀࡓබ⫋⪅ࡢ⊂༨ⓗ࡞ᙺࢆ⠽ ዣࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊ㠀ᖖࢃࡋ࠸ࠋࡇࡢࣔࢹࣝ࠾࠸࡚ࠊᕷẸᡂࡋ࠺ࡿࡇࡣࠊ ࡏ࠸ࡐ࠸ࠊᜏᖖⓗ࡞㞟ᅋ࣭ᵓ㐀ࢆᣢࡓࡎࠊබඹࡢࡘࡁ㆟ㄽࡍࡿࡓࡵࠊࡑࡢࠎ 㞟ࡲࡾࠊ㔜࡞ᚲせᛶࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿሙྜࡣࠊᕷẸࡢぢゎࢆᙼࡽࡢ௦⾲⪅ఏ㐩ࡍࡿࡓࡵ ㄳ㢪ࡍࡿࡇࡄࡽ࠸࡛࠶ࡿ102ࠖࠋ ࡇࡢࣔࢹࣝࡣࠊ⌧௦ࡢ➨୍ಟṇࡢゎ㔘᫂ࡽ㐺ྜࡋ࡞࠸ࠋࡑࡇ࡛ࠊᙼࡣࠊࣇ࢙ࢹࣛ ࣜࢫࢺࣔࢹࣝࢆ㏥ࡅࠊඹඪࣔࢹࣝࢆ᥇⏝ࡍࡁࡍࡿ103ࠋࡇࡢࣔࢹࣝ࠾࠸࡚ࠊᕷẸࡣࠊ ࠕࡼࡾ⾜ືⓗ࡛ࠊ㞟ᅋⓗ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ௦⾲⪅ࢆᑛ㔜ࡍࡿࡇࡢ࡞࠸㸦disrespectful㸧ࠊࡣᡪ ືⓗ࡞104ࠖࡶࡢࡋ࡚⌮ゎࡉࢀࠊᕷẸࡣࠊࠕᕷẸࡢ⚾ⓗ㞟ᅋࠖࡋ࡚⾜ືࡋ࠺ࡿࠋ ウ バグワットにおける「言論」 ᙼࡢࠕᨻⓗࠖࡢពᡠࢁ࠺ࠋᙼࡣࠊᕷẸࡣࠊ༢ᢞ⚊ࡼࡗ࡚௦⾲⪅ࢆ㑅ฟࡍࡿ ࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊ⤯࠼ࡎ㆟ㄽཧຍࡍࡿࡶࡢࡋ࡚⌮ゎࡍࡿࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࠕᕷẸࡀᨻⓗ㈨᱁ ࡋ࡚⾜ືࡋࡼ࠺ࡍࡿࠊᙼࡽࡣࡰᖖࠊ㞟ᅋࢆ㏻ࡌ࡚⾜ືࡍࡿࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࡑࡢ㞟ᅋ ࡣࠊᨻඪ࣭NRA࣭ࢩ࢚ࣛࢡࣛࣈࡢࡼ࠺࡞බⓗ࡞ᐇᅾ࡛࠶ࡿࠊࡑࢀࡶࠊ㸺࢛࣮࢘ࣝ⾤ࢆ ༨ᣐࡏࡼ㸦Occupy㸧㸼ࡢࡼ࠺࡞ࠊࡼࡾ㠀බᘧ࡞㞟ྜ࡛࠶ࡿࢆၥࢃ࡞࠸ࠋᙼࡽࡣࠊࡑࡢࡼ ࠺࡞㞟ᅋࢆ㏻ࡌ࡚ࠊᙼࡽࡢ౯್ࢹࣥࢸࢸࢆⓎぢ࣭Ⓨᒎࡉࡏࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊࡑࡢࡼ ࠺࡞㞟ᅋࢆ㏻ࡌ࡚ࡢࡳࠊಶேࡋ࡚ࡢᕷẸࡣࠊࡢᕷẸ࣭බ⫋⪅ࡀ⪥ࢆഴࡅ࡚ࡃࢀࡿᮇ 99 Id. at 1116. 100 Id. at 1121. 101 Id. at 1122 102 Id. 103 Id. at 1123. 104 Id. 䠉㻌㻌㻞㻣㻜㻌䠉
21 ᚅ࡛ࡁࡿ105ࠖࠋࡘࡲࡾࠊᕷẸࡼࡿᨻⓗ࣭ᩥⓗ౯್ࡢⓎᒎ࣭ඹ᭷ࡣࠊබⓗ࡞ウ㆟ࡢࡳ࡛ ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊ⚾ⓗ࡞ヰࡼࡗ࡚ࡶ⾜ࢃࢀࡿࠋࡑࢀࡺ࠼ࠊᙼࡢࠕᨻⓗࠖࡣࠊࠕከࡃࡢ⫈⾗ ྥࡅ࡚࠸ࡿ࠸࠺ព࡛ࡢ͆බඹ͇ࠖᛶࢆᚲせࡍࡿࠊ⊃࠸ព࡛ࡢࡑࢀ㝈ࡽࢀ࡞࠸ࠋࠕ⛉ Ꮫⓗ▱㆑ࠊᩥࡢඹ᭷࣭Ⓨᒎࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࡼࡾᗈࡃ౯್ࡢලయࡣᕷẸ࠸㛵ಀࡍࡿࠖ ࡢ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢࡶࠊࠕゝㄽࠖྵࡲࢀࡿ106ࠋ ᙼࡢ㆟ㄽࡣࠊ㸦ࡇࡇ࡛ࡣᢅ࠺ࡇࡣ࡛ࡁ࡞ࡗࡓࡀࠊ㸧ࣜ࣋ࣥࢪ࣏ࣝࣀࠊಶேࢹ࣮ࢱࡢ 㞟࠸ࡗࡓࣥࢱ࣮ࢿࢵࢺࡢᬑཬక࠸Ⓩሙࡋࡓ᪂ࡓ࡞ၥ㢟ࡑࢀࡀࡶࡓࡽࡍᐖᝏࡢ㜵 Ṇࡢࡓࡵࡣࠊࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ/ࠕಖㆤࠖ༊ศㄽࢆᨵࡵ᳨࡚ウࡋ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࡢၥ㢟ព㆑ ᇶ࡙ࡃ107ࠋࡑࡢࡓࡵࠊᙼࡢᐃ⩏ࡼࢀࡤࠊࡅࢇゝⴥ➼ࡢChaplinskyุỴࡢࣜࢫࢺᣲࡆ ࡽࢀࡓゝㄽ⠊ࡀゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖྵࡲࢀࡿྰࡘ࠸࡚ࡣ┤᥋᫂ࡽࡣࡋ࡚ ࠸࡞࠸ࠋࡋࡋࠊࡅࢇゝⴥࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊ㸦⊃࠸ព࡛ࡢ㸧ᨻࡶࠊᩥࡶ㛵㐃ࡋ࡚࠸ ࡞࠸ࡓࡵࠊࡲࡓࠊࢃ࠸ࡏࡘ⾲⌧ࡘ࠸࡚ࡶࠊ࣑࣮ࣛᇶ‽ࡀࠕ┿ᦸ࡞ᩥᏛⓗࠊⱁ⾡ⓗࠊᨻ ⓗࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊ⛉Ꮫⓗ౯್ࢆḞ࠸࡚࠸ࡿࡇࠖ࠸࠺せ௳ࢆㄢࡍ௨ୖࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ ᅖࠖእ⨨ࢀࡿࡼ࠺ᛮࢃࢀࡿࠋᑐࠊබ⫋⪅ᑐࡍࡿྡẋᦆࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊࡲࡉࠊ බ⫋⪅ࡢ㈐௵ࢆ㏣ཬࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊẸ⩏࠾ࡅࡿᕷẸࡢᆅᙉࡃ⤖ࡧࡘ࠸࡚࠸ ࡿࠋࡲࡓࠊඣ❺࣏ࣝࣀࡘ࠸࡚ࡶࠊᨻ࣭ᩥࡢ㛵㐃ᛶࡣ࡞࠸ࡓࡵࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ ᅖࠖእ⨨ࢀࡿ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ࠋ (4)小括 ᙼࡢぢゎࡣࠊᇶᮏⓗࡣࠊ⮬ᕫ⤫ࡢ⌮ㄽࡽฟⓎࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ108ࠋࡑࡢୖ࡛ࠊ࣓ࣜ࢝᠇ἲ ࠾ࡅࡿ௦⾲Ẹไ༶ࡋࡓࠕᕷẸࠖࣔࢹࣝࡢᒎ㛤ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊࠕᕷẸࠖࢆ࠸ࢃࡤ፹ 㡯ࡋ࡚ࠊࠕᨻⓗࠖࡢពࢆᣑᙇࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ⮬ᕫ⤫ࡢ⌮ㄽຍ࠼࡚ࠊ⮬ᕫᐇ⌧ࡢ⌮ㄽ➼ ࢆຍࡍࡿከඖⓗ࡞ㄝ᫂ࢆࡿࡇࡣࠊࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡢ⏬ᐃࡗ࡚ᚲࡎࡋࡶ᭷ ຠࡣ࠸࠼࡞࠸109ࠋ≉ࠊᛮࡢ⮬⏤ᕷሙㄽ࣭ಶேࡢ⮬ᚊࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊࡑࢀࡽࢆᙉㄪࡋࡓሙ ྜࠊ࠶ࡿゝㄽࢆࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖࡢ⠊ᅖእ⨨ࡃࡇࡀᅔ㞴࡞ࡿࡢᣦࡀ࠶ࡿ110ࠋࡇࢀ 105 Id. at 1116.
106 Bhagwat, supra note 2, at 874. ేࡏ࡚ࣂࢢ࣡ࢵࢺࡣࠊᕷẸࡢ▱㆑ࠊᩥࠊ౯್ᑐࡍࡿᨻᗓࡢࢥࣥࢺ࣮ࣟ ࣝࡀࠊேẸࡼࡿ⤫࠸࠺࣓ࣜ࢝᠇ἲࡢ๓ᥦ㐺ྜࡋ࡞࠸ࡇࡶࠊࠕᨻⓗࠖࢆࡼࡾᗈࡃᤊ࠼ࡿࡁ ⌮⏤ࡋ࡚ᣦࡍࡿࠋ
107 Id. at 883. 108 Id. at 884.
109 ๓ᥖὀ㸦68㸧ࡑࡢᮏᩥཧ↷ࠋ
110 Abu El-Haj, supra note 68, at 925. ࡞࠾ࠊᙼዪ⮬㌟ࡣࠊ㆟ㄽࡢฟⓎⅬࢆ⮬ᕫ⤫ࡢ⌮ㄽ⨨ࡃࡀࠊࠕᨻ ⓗゝㄽࠖࠕ㠀ᨻⓗゝㄽࠖࡢ༊ูࡣࠕ⮬ᕫ⤫ࡢ┈㸦the self-governance interest㸧ࠖࡢ၏୍ࡢㄽ⌮ⓗ
22 ࡽࢆ⪃៖ࡍࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࢀࡤࠊᙼࡢぢゎࡣࠊఱࡽࡢᇶ♏⌮ㄽᇶ࡙ࡁࠊุἲ⌮࠾ࡅࡿ᪤Ꮡ ࡢゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࢆㄝ᫂ࡍࡿ᪉ἲࡋ࡚ࠊࡲࡓࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖጇᙜ࡞⥺ᘬ ࡁࢆຍ࠼ࡿ⌮ㄽࡋ࡚㨩ຊⓗ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ ࡶࡗࡶࠊᙼ⮬㌟ࡶᣦࡍࡿࡼ࠺ࠊࠕᕷẸࠖࡼࡿ༊ศࡶࠊุἲ⌮࠾ࡅࡿ᪤Ꮡࡢゝㄽ ࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡢㄝ᫂ࡣᡂຌࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠋࠕၟᴗྲྀᘬ࠾ࡅࡿᥦࡍࡂ࡞࠸ࠖၟᴗⓗゝ ㄽࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊᙼࡢࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࡽࡣ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖእ⨨ࢀ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺ྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿ ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿ111ࠋ ⤖ᯝ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࡍࡿࠋࡑࡢୖ࡛ࠊ࣏ࢫࢺࡢ㆟ㄽࢆཧ↷ࡋࠊࠕ➨୍ಟṇࡢಖㆤࡣࠊẸⓗ࡞ᅜᐙࢆࡑࡢᕷẸࡢど Ⅼࡽぢ࡚ಙ㢗ࡀ࠶ࡾࠊࡑࡋ࡚㈐௵࠶ࡿࡶࡢ࡛ࡁࡿࠊࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥ࠾ࡼࡧ⾜Ⅽ㸦࠼ࡤᢞ⚊ࠊᢠ㆟ ⾜ືࠊ⤖㞟ࡍࡿࡇ㸧ࡢᙧែࡲ࡛ཬࡪࠖࡢ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊࠕ[➨୍ಟṇࡢ㸸ᘬ⏝⪅]ಖㆤࡣࠊᙜヱ⾲⌧ࡀ┤᥋Ẹ ⓗウㄽ࠾ࡼࡧẸⓗཧຍྥࡅࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡢྥࡅࡽࢀࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋẸ⩏࠾ࡅࡿᕷẸࡗ࡚ ᚲせ࡞ࠊಶேࡢ⮬ᚊࡋ࡚ࠊ࠾ࡼࡧࠊⰋᚰࡢ⮬⏤ࡋ࡚ྍḞ࡞ࡶࡢᑐࡍࡿࠊࡑࡢゝㄽࡢ㔜せᛶྥࡅࡽ ࢀࡿࠖࡋ࡚ࠊࠕᕷẸࠖࠕ⮬ᕫ⤫ࡢ┈ࠖࢆ㔜どࡍࡿ㸦at 926-27 quoting Robert Post, The Constitutional Status of Commercial Speech, 48 UCLA L. REV. 1, 4 (2000)㸧ࠋ
111 Bhagwat, supra note 2, at 884.(quoting Pharmacy, at 762). ࡓࡔࡋࠊࣂࢢ࣡ࢵࢺࡣࠊ㑊ዷලᛶឤᰁ 㛵ࡍࡿሗᥦ౪ࢆྵࡴࣃࣥࣇࣞࢵࢺࢆၟᴗⓗゝㄽࡋࡓ Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp., 463 U.S. 60, 64-68 (1983)ࢆᘬ⏝ࡋࡘࡘࠊࠕ㐃㑥᭱㧗ࡣࠊᚋࠊၟᴗⓗゝㄽࡢᐃ⩏ࢆࠊ᫂ࡽẸ⩏㐣⛬㛵ࢃ ࡿ㢟ࡢ㆟ㄽࢆྵࡴࡶࡢࡲ࡛ᣑᙇࡋࡓࠖࡓࡵࠊၟᴗⓗゝㄽ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࡶ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖྵࡲࢀࡿྍ⬟ᛶ ࡀ࠶ࡿࡢ␃ಖࢆࡘࡅ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ
23
おわりに
௨ୖࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢࠕゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࠖࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖࡘ࠸᳨࡚ウࡋ࡚ࡁࡓࠋStevens௳ุỴࡢⓏሙࠊ ࣜ࣋ࣥࢪ࣏ࣝࣀࡢࡼ࠺࡞᪂ࡓ࡞ၥ㢟ࡢⓏሙࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ࣓ࣜ࢝᠇ἲᏛㄝ࠾࠸࡚ࠊࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ/ࠕಖ ㆤࠖ༊ศㄽࡀ㔜せ࡞᳨ウㄢ㢟࡞ࡾࡘࡘ࠶ࡿࡼ࠺ᛮࢃࢀࡿࡀࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢࠕ⠊ᅖࠖ㛵ࡍ ࡿ᪤Ꮡࡢุἲ⌮ࢆグ㏙ⓗㄝ᫂ྍ⬟࡞⌮ㄽࢆᥦ♧ࡋࡘࡘࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢၥ㢟ᑐᛂࡍࡿࡇࡣࡸ ࡣࡾᅔ㞴࡞ㄢ㢟࡛࠶ࡿゝࢃࡊࡿࢆᚓ࡞࠸ࠋ≉ࠊ➨୍ಟṇࡢ┠ⓗࠊ࡞࠸ࡋࠊゝㄽࡢ⮬⏤ࡢ᰿ ᣐㄽ䭧ࡗࡓㄝ᫂ࡣࠊ㸦୍ࡘࡢ⌮ㄽࢆ᥇⏝ࡋࡓሙྜࠊከඖⓗ࡞ㄝ᫂ࢆ᥇⏝ࡋࡓሙྜࢆၥࢃࡎࠊ㸧 ᅔ㞴࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢⅬ࠾࠸࡚ࠊࢩ࣮ࣕ࢘ࡢࡼ࠺ࠊᇶ♏⌮ㄽࡢእ࠶ࡿㅖせᅉࢆᣢࡕฟࡍࡇ ࡸࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊࢩࣗࣀ࣮ࡢࡼ࠺ࠊ♫Ꮫⓗ⌧㇟ࡋ࡚ࡢࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࢆヨࡳࡿࡇࡶ☜ ୍ࡘࡢ᪉ྥᛶ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ ࡇࢀᑐࡋ࡚ࠊୖグࡢᅔ㞴࡞ㄢ㢟ࢆࠊ⮬ᕫ⤫ࡢ⌮ㄽࡽࢫࢱ࣮ࢺࡋࠊࡇࢀࠕᕷẸࠖ࠸ ࠺፹㡯ࢆᅾࡉࡏࡿࡇࡼࡗ࡚ࡾ㉺࠼ࡼ࠺ࡍࡿࠊࣂࢢ࣡ࢵࢺࡢぢゎࡣࠊ♧၀ⓗ࠸࠼ ࡼ࠺ࠋ [グ] ᮏ◊✲ࡣJSPS⛉◊㈝ JP18K12639ࡢຓᡂࢆཷࡅࡓࡶࡢ࡛ࡍࠋ 䠉㻌㻌㻞㻣㻟㻌䠉24
Summary
“Freedom of Speech”: Its Coverage and Purpose
Hiroaki Kanehara
Is revenge porn “speech” covered by First Amendment?
This essay will examine First Amendment’s “coverage” and theories underlying it
(for example, self-government, democratic deliberation, self-expression, personal
autonomy, search for truth, and marketplace of ideas). Theory based on (nuanced)
self-government may provide proper limits to the freedom of speech.