Prior restraint and criminal punishment would seem to be two fairly obvious standards. Neither apply in this case.
Freedom of speech is never an absolute, it had a long history of far lower significance in the United States prior to the 1950s, and has a long an complex history.
I'm not a legal scholar, I'm still researching the background and history myself. Two resources of possible interest and use to yourself and others:
Jacob Mchangama's Clear and Present Danger podcast, 40 episodes plus several special installments on the history of free expression. The creator tends rather more libertarian than I, though he's not an absolutist. That said, there's reasonably little bias I'd noted in the overall presentation, which is nuanced.
On texts ... there's a whole heck of a lot. I've not read the Very Short Introduction title yet, but have added it to my own reading mountain/asteroid:
Freedom of speech is never an absolute, it had a long history of far lower significance in the United States prior to the 1950s, and has a long an complex history.
I'm not a legal scholar, I'm still researching the background and history myself. Two resources of possible interest and use to yourself and others:
Jacob Mchangama's Clear and Present Danger podcast, 40 episodes plus several special installments on the history of free expression. The creator tends rather more libertarian than I, though he's not an absolutist. That said, there's reasonably little bias I'd noted in the overall presentation, which is nuanced.
<http://www.freespeechhistory.com/>
On texts ... there's a whole heck of a lot. I've not read the Very Short Introduction title yet, but have added it to my own reading mountain/asteroid:
<https://www.worldcat.org/title/244062809>
<http://libgen.rs/book/index.php?md5=8647BBCBFB1AADAC2A4C98ED...>
Looking that up just now, the author, Nigel Warburton, is known to me from other books on philosophy which were good.