This limitation places the rights of the individual in conflict with what might be perceived as what is best for most of society. An example of this involves individuals rights to free speech. The First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees a person s right to freely express him- or herself. This right, however, is not limitless. A person does not have a right to say what are known as fighting words.
Fighting words are words that tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.
They are words that are likely to provoke instantaneous retaliatory violence by those to whom they are directed. The Supreme Court has held that fighting words are not constitutionally protected. This conflict often arises in cases involving disorderly conduct. The cases in the text involve prosecutions where the defendant was protesting the action of police officers. The courts held that so long as the protests made by the defendants did not rise to the level of fighting words, they had a right to disagree with the actions of the police and to voice their disagreement.