Byers - The constitutional guarantee of free speech does not permit a state to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.

What does the constitutional guarantee of free speech permit a state to forbid or proscribe?

1. Advocacy of the use of force
2. Advocacy of law violation
3. Advocacy directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action
4. Advocacy likely to incite or produce imminent lawless action

The constitutional guarantee of free speech permits a state to forbid or proscribe advocacy that is directed to and likely to incite or produce imminent lawless action, as established by the Brandenburg v. Ohio case.

Explanation:

The constitutional guarantee of free speech permits a state to forbid or proscribe advocacy in specific contexts. Based on the ruling in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the First Amendment protects the advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except in certain circumstances. According to the imminent lawless action standard established in this case, a state is permitted to forbid advocacy that is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action. Therefore, while general advocacy of the use of force or law violation is protected, advocacy that meets the criteria of being directed to and likely to incite or produce imminent lawless action is not protected.

To answer the student's question:

Advocacy of the use of force - Protected unless it meets criteria for prohibition.
Advocacy of law violation - Protected unless it meets criteria for prohibition.
Advocacy directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action - Can be forbidden.
Advocacy likely to incite or produce imminent lawless action - Can be forbidden.