# Are "fighting words" actually illegal anywhere in the US nowadays? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 7, 2012, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032 "2012-03-07T13:17:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![robert\_columbia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@robert\_columbia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robert_columbia)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2012, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032/1 "2012-03-07T13:17:26Z")
In the US, one of the famous exceptions to the First Amendment guarantee of free speech is so called “fighting words”, and our court system has established that legislatures may regulate such speech, making arrests and prosecutions under such laws not a violation of Free Speech. Anyway, to what extent do laws prohibiting “fighting words” actually still exist on the books today? Is there any jurisdiction in the US where, even though “fighting words” may not be 100% protected by the First Amendment, they are _nonetheless legal_ because local, state, and/or territorial law does not actually outlaw them? Consider, as an analogy, that the “right” to camp in public parks where such camping is _legal_ is not a _constitutionally guaranteed_ right, and the legislature can choose to make it 100% legal, 100% illegal, or place conditions on it without running afoul of the Bill of Rights. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2012, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032/2 "2012-03-08T02:06:08Z")
WV has an “insults statute”: §55-7-2. Insulting words. All words which, from their usual construction and common acceptation, are construed as insults and tend to violence and breach of the peace, shall be actionable. No demurrer shall preclude a jury from passing thereon. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_T](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Gary\_T](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_T)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2012, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032/3 "2012-03-08T02:09:21Z")
**No demurrer shall preclude a jury from passing thereon.** 😕 Can someone translate that for me, please? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2012, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032/4 "2012-03-08T02:45:57Z")
> [@Gary\_T](#): > > **No demurrer shall preclude a jury from passing thereon.** > > 😕 Can someone translate that for me, please? 😕 It means a judge can’t rule that such and such word is not really an insult. A jury has to make the call. Interestingly, the law was passed in 1923 as an anti-dueling statute. It was felt that if there was a remedy at law for an insult, a gentleman didn’t need to resort to pistols at dawn. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2012, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032/5 "2012-03-08T06:46:52Z")
Wouldn’t \*Disturbing the Peace \*laws cover fighting words in a lot of circumstances? Because of the exception provided, a defendant couldn’t argue constitutional free speech as a defense in such cases. ---
**Author:** ![Miss\_Violaceous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Miss\_Violaceous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miss_Violaceous)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2012, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032/6 "2012-03-08T11:58:30Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Wouldn’t \*Disturbing the Peace \*laws cover fighting words in a lot of circumstances? Because of the exception provided, a defendant couldn’t argue constitutional free speech as a defense in such cases. Check out Virginia’s disorderly conduct statute. [http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-415](http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-415) We also have one for abusive language “reasonably calculated to provoke a breach of the peace.” [http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-416](http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-416) ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2012, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032/7 "2012-03-08T13:18:04Z")
Although oddly enough, “fighting words” isn’t a defense against being charged for _responding_ to them. ---
**Author:** ![ducati](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/cc9497/32.png) [@ducati](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ducati)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2012, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032/8 "2012-03-08T14:19:43Z")
**Georgia Code - Crimes and Offenses - Title 16, Section 16-11-39** (3) Without provocation, uses to or of another person in such other person´s presence, opprobrious or abusive words which by their very utterance tend to incite to an immediate breach of the peace, that is to say, words which as a matter of common knowledge and under ordinary circumstances will, when used to or of another person in such other person´s presence, naturally tend to provoke violent resentment, that is, **words commonly called 'fighting words’** You also can’t curse in front of someone under 14 years of age. Here in Jawja, \*\*we \*\*think of the cheerins. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2012, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032/9 "2012-03-08T14:19:49Z")
I suppose the first amendment issue is tied to the circumstances. If you are face to face with someone and say something obviously designed to provoke a direct reaction in the heat of the moment (“Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled to elderberries…”) that may be a deliberate breach of the peace - so is incitement to riot. If you publish a book of Mohammed cartoons or commentary in a newspaper, and people come looking for you a day or a week later, they had plenty of time to cool off, they are violating your right to free speech. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2012, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032/10 "2012-03-08T14:41:15Z")
While the fighting words doctrine is technically still alive, it’s my opinion that any specific instance of restrictions on fighting words coming before a court would be thrown out under the First Amendment. ---
**Author:** ![shiftless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9c0ed/32.png) [@shiftless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/shiftless)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2012, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032/11 "2012-03-08T14:58:15Z")
> [@Miss\_Violaceous](#): > > We also have one for abusive language “reasonably calculated to provoke a breach of the peace.” [http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-416](http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-416) If we only had some language police to patrol the beltway every morning. I see a great new revenue source for the Commonwealth. ---
**Author:** ![lawbuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@lawbuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawbuff)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2012, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032/12 "2012-03-08T15:47:50Z")
My law dictionary cites as one case; 266 A. 2d 579. **A** is for the Atlantic Reporter series. > **[STATE v. PROFACI | 56 N.J. 346 (1970) | 56nj3461314 | Leagle.com](https://www.leagle.com/decision/197040256nj3461314.xml)** > > The opinion of the court was delivered by HANEMAN J. This case involves the constitutionality of N.J.S.A. 2A 170 29 1 a section...56nj3461314 General disorderly conduct laws would possibly apply, or in Ohio, maybe Menacing, of course, as always, the CONENT, is legally critical. In a few rare states, defamation is still criminal. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2012, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-fighting-words-actually-illegal-anywhere-in-the-us-nowadays/615032/13 "2012-03-08T20:23:34Z")
Yes, Disorderly Conduct would apply in Ohio: \*§2917.11. Disorderly conduct (A) No person shall recklessly cause inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm to another by doing any of the following: (1) Engaging in fighting, in threatening harm to persons or property, or in violent or turbulent behavior; (2) Making unreasonable noise or an offensively coarse utterance, gesture, or display or communicating unwarranted and grossly abusive language to any person; (3) Insulting, taunting, or challenging another, under circumstances in which that conduct is likely to provoke a violent response;…\*