Slippery Slope (Censorship)

Extracted Attributes

• Definition

  The argument that the consequence of limiting speech is an inevitable slide into total censorship and tyranny.

• Legal Context

  First Amendment to the United States Constitution

• Key Legal Precedent

  Miller v. California (1973), which established that obscenity is not protected speech.

• U.S. Press Freedom Rank

  57th out of 180 countries (2025)

• U.S. Press Freedom Status

  Problematic

• Corporate Censorship Concern

  The theory that if corporations do not follow the Bill of Rights, the government will be influenced to increase censorship.

Timeline

• The U.S. Supreme Court rules in Miller v. California that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment, establishing a legal boundary for censorship. (Source: Wikipedia)

  1973-06-21

• Alex Jones is banned from multiple major social media platforms, an event David Sacks later identifies as the start of a slippery slope in digital censorship. (Source: eb4480db-8906-408f-b8da-c7f2622c98ce)

  2018-08-06

• PEN America issues a report cautioning that the normalization of book banning in schools represents a slippery slope toward state-level censorship. (Source: Web Search (PEN America))

  2022-01-01

• Elon Musk reinstates Alex Jones on X, sparking a debate among tech commentators about the limits of free speech and the risks of content moderation. (Source: eb4480db-8906-408f-b8da-c7f2622c98ce)

  2023-12-09

• Reporters Without Borders ranks the United States 57th in the Press Freedom Index, designating the environment as problematic. (Source: Wikipedia)

  2025-01-01

Censorship in the United States

In the United States, censorship involves the suppression of speech or public communication and raises issues of freedom of speech, which is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Interpretation of this fundamental freedom has varied since its enshrinement. Traditionally, the First Amendment was regarded as applying only to the Federal government, leaving the states and local communities free to censor or not. As the applicability of states' rights in lawmaking vis-a-vis citizens' national rights began to wane in the wake of the Civil War, censorship by any level of government eventually came under scrutiny, but not without resistance. For example, in recent decades, censorial restraints increased during the 1950s period of widespread anti-communist sentiment, as exemplified by the hearings of the House Committee on Un-American Activities. In Miller v. California (1973), the U.S. Supreme Court found that the First Amendment's freedom of speech does not apply to obscenity, which can, therefore, be censored. While certain forms of hate speech are legal so long as they do not turn to action or incite others to commit illegal acts, more severe forms have led to people or groups (such as the Ku Klux Klan) being denied marching permits or the Westboro Baptist Church being sued, although the initial adverse ruling against the latter was later overturned on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court case Snyder v. Phelps. The First Amendment protects against censorship imposed by law, but does not protect against corporate censorship, the restraint of speech of spokespersons, employees, or business associates by threatening monetary loss, loss of employment, or loss of access to the marketplace. Legal expenses can be a significant hidden restraint where there is fear of suit for libel. Many people in the United States are in favor of restricting censorship by corporations, citing a slippery slope that if corporations do not follow the Bill of Rights, the government will be influenced. Analysts from Reporters Without Borders ranked the United States 57th in the world out of 180 countries in their 2025 Press Freedom Index and they gave the country a "problematic" designation. Certain forms of speech, such as obscenity and defamation, are restricted in communications media by the government or by the industry on its own.

Web Search Results

• Freedom of Speech - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

  Before we do this, however, the reader might wish to disagree with the above claims and warn of the dangers of the “slippery slope.” Those who support the slippery slope argument claim that the consequence of limiting speech is the inevitable slide into censorship and tyranny. Such arguments assume that we can be on or off the slope. In fact, no such choice exists: we are necessarily on the slope whether we like it or not, and [...] [As of January 2008, typing “free speech” on Google will net millions of entries. Hence it is best to simply jump in and see what one can find. It is worth noting that almost all of them are devoted to the promotion of speech in the face of censorship. This reflects a strong bias on the internet in favor of the “slippery slope” view of free speech. There are not many entries where an argument is made for placing limitations on free expression. Wikipedia [...] provoked significant commentary, most of it taking the form of slippery-slope claims that such a ruling would inevitably lead to a totalitarian state. In Australia the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 states that “It is unlawful for a person to do an act, otherwise than in private, If: (a) the act is reasonably likely in all the circumstances to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or group of people, and (b) the act is done

• The Normalization of Book Banning - PEN America

  It is well known that censorship can be a slippery slope and that banning “just one book” will never appease coordinated efforts to remove certain topics, ideas, and identities from public schools. As Laura Numeroff and Felicia Bond warned us in their book, If You Give a Mouse a Cookie, those making demands will always want more. Today’s ideological censors feed not on the number of books banned, but on the ideas and people contained within these books’ pages. Banning books with trans [...] In 2022, we cautioned that book bans and related threats to free expression and the First Amendment should not be ignored; that this assault on students’ freedom to read is a slippery slope; and that state censorship of this nature, once unleashed, would snowball. Today, that escalation is no longer hypothetical. For many students, families, educators, librarians, and school districts, book banning is a new normal.

• Is Censorship Ever Necessary or Justified?

  The debate over censorship in the West is a complex tug-of-war. While freedom of expression is respected as a fundamental right, the question of whether and where to draw the line comes up time and again, and remains contentious. Advocates argue that censorship may be the only way to protect vulnerable minorities, new ones and old ones alike, from potential harm and violence. Nevertheless, critics caution against the slippery slope of censorship, warning of its potential to stifle dissent, [...] providers. [...] disinformation.

• [PDF] The Mechanisms of the Slippery Slope - UCLA Law

  Olson & David B. Kopel, All the Way down the Slippery Slope: Gun Prohibition in England and Some Lessons for Civil Liberties in America, 22 HAMLINE L. REV. 399, 433 (1999) (making the same point); Bernard Williams, Which Slopes Are Slippery?, in MORAL DILEMMAS IN MODERN MEDICINE i26, 127-28 (Michael Lockwood ed., 1985) (pointing out that even if "some distinction between A and B can reasonably be defended," it may be that it "cannot effectively be" defended; some distinctions "are intrinsically [...] 4. Legal-Cost-Lowering Slippery Slopes. -Let us briefly revisit the argument that gun registration may increase the chances of gun confis-cation. Today, gun confiscation would be hard to enforce, partly be-cause of the Fourth Amendment.54 Searching all homes for some or all kinds of guns would be unconstitutional, a classic impermissible gen-eral search. 55 This, in a sense, is a cost of confiscation -not a finan-cial cost, but a legal cost that keeps confiscation from being performed [...] II. COST-LOWERING SLIPPERY SLOPES AND OTHER MULTI-PEAKED PREFERENCES SLIPPERY SLOPES A. Cost-Lowering Slippery Slopes i. An Example. -Let's begin with the slippery slope question mentioned in the Introduction: does it make sense for someone to op-pose gun registration (A) because registration might make it more likely that others will eventually enact gun confiscation (B)? 40 A and B are logically distinguishable, but can A nonetheless help lead to B?

• Slippery Slope Fallacy | Definition & Examples - Scribbr

  Slippery slope fallacy occurs when a person asserts that a relatively small step will lead to a chain of events that result in a drastic change or a negative outcome. This assertion is called a slippery slope argument. [...] The slippery slope fallacy is a logical fallacy or reasoning error. More specifically, it is an informal fallacy where the error lies in the content of the argument rather than its format (formal fallacy). Therefore, not every slippery slope argument is flawed. When there is evidence that the consequences of the initial action are highly likely to occur, then the slippery slope argument is not fallacious. [...] We strongly encourage students to use sources in their work. You can cite our article (APA Style) or take a deep dive into the articles below. Nikolopoulou, K. (2024, February 26). Slippery Slope Fallacy | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved January 5, 2026, from Jefferson, A. (2014). Slippery Slope Arguments. Philosophy Compass, 9(10), 672-680. ##### Is this article helpful? Kassiani Nikolopoulou Kassiani Nikolopoulou ## Kassiani Nikolopoulou ## Other students also liked