Abstract
The telephone has enabled significant enhancements in communication. However, it has also brought with it abuses. One of these is telephonic harassment. The states and the federal government have passed laws that criminalize this inappropriate and psychologically harmful use of telephones. This Article assumes that these laws are constitutional when the caller harasses an ordinary citizen. But the First Amendment protects the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. So, what happens when the caller is both petitioning the government and intending to harass a government official? Does the First Amendment protect telephonic harassment of a public official? State and lower federal courts have responded in a variety of conflicting ways. This Article seeks to address deficiencies in those responses while recommending a refinement of the best approach to reconciling this legal conflict, the significant component test. When the test is applicable, courts should avoid examining the content of harassing calls to determine whether a matter of public concern is a significant component of the call. Instead, non-speech contextual factors should be considered.
Recommended Citation
Daniel Caballero,
Petition for Redress or Telephonic Harassment? When Calling the Government Is a Crime,
2
Fordham L. Voting Rts. & Democracy F.
293
(2024).
Available at:
https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/vrdf/vol2/iss2/4