Answer:
Brandenburg v. Ohio US
Supreme Court decision maintains that seditious speech -- including speech that constitutes an incitement to violence--is protected by the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution as long as it does not indicate an imminent threat.
Explanation:
The Supreme court upheld a symbolic speech restriction in Tinker v. Des Moines; whereas, struck down the same restriction in the Brandenburg vs Ohio Supreme Court.
The symbolic speech is enumerated under the first constitutional amendment and excludes any speech threatening in nature.
Supreme Court is the judicial body in the United States of America, and no other authority has the power to overturn its decisions.
In this regard, the Supreme Court maintained in Brandenburg vs Ohio that the restrictions of the symbolic speech cannot be upheld, and the exact opposite happened in the case of Tinker v. Des Moines.
Hence, the decisions of the Supreme Court regarding the symbolic speech are as aforementioned.
Learn more about symbolic speech here:
https://brainly.com/question/4343271
#SPJ2
