Unverified50% confidenceFactExact time
The U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed in multiple rulings that a chilling effect itself can constitute a violation of First Amendment rights.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
9/24/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
Unverified2024年美国最高法院在Lindke v. Freed案中裁定，公职人员在特定条件下屏蔽公民可能构成违反第一修正案的行为73% similarUnverifiedMinor protection bills in some U.S. states have been partially or fully struck down by courts on the grounds of violating the First Amendment (freedom of speech)69% similarUnverifiedThe First, Third, Fifth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuit Courts of the United States have established precedent that the First Amendment protects the recording of law enforcement activities.69% similarUnverified美国联邦法院对提交虚假引用律师的制裁法律依据主要源自《联邦民事诉讼规则》第11条（Rule 11）68% similarUnverified在美国民事诉讼中，拒绝配合或隐瞒证据可能构成妨碍司法（Spoliation of Evidence），法庭有权实施制裁，包括不利推定指示或直接判定不利裁决63% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/945753API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/945753MCP
get_claim(id=945753)