speech mean in

• Daily Crossword
• Word Puzzle
• Word Finder
• Word of the Day
• Synonym of the Day
• Word of the Year
• Language stories
• All featured
• Gender and sexuality
• All pop culture
• Writing hub
• Grammar essentials
• Commonly confused
• All writing tips
• Pop culture
• Writing tips

Advertisement

Losing her speech made her feel isolated from humanity.

Synonyms: communication , conversation , parley , parlance

He expresses himself better in speech than in writing.

We waited for some speech that would indicate her true feelings.

Synonyms: talk , mention , comment , asseveration , assertion , observation

a fiery speech.

Synonyms: discourse , talk

• any single utterance of an actor in the course of a play, motion picture, etc.

Synonyms: patois , tongue

Your slovenly speech is holding back your career.

• a field of study devoted to the theory and practice of oral communication.
• Archaic. rumor .

to have speech with somebody

speech therapy

• that which is spoken; utterance
• a talk or address delivered to an audience
• a person's characteristic manner of speaking
• a national or regional language or dialect
• linguistics another word for parole

Discover More

Other words from.

• self-speech noun

Word History and Origins

Origin of speech 1

Synonym Study

Example sentences.

Kids are interacting with Alexas that can record their voice data and influence their speech and social development.

The attorney general delivered a controversial speech Wednesday.

For example, my company, Teknicks, is working with an online K-12 speech and occupational therapy provider.

Instead, it would give tech companies a powerful incentive to limit Brazilians’ freedom of speech at a time of political unrest.

However, the president did give a speech in Suresnes, France, the next day during a ceremony hosted by the American Battle Monuments Commission.

Those are troubling numbers, for unfettered speech is not incidental to a flourishing society.

There is no such thing as speech so hateful or offensive it somehow “justifies” or “legitimizes” the use of violence.

We need to recover and grow the idea that the proper answer to bad speech is more and better speech.

Tend to your own garden, to quote the great sage of free speech, Voltaire, and invite people to follow your example.

The simple, awful truth is that free speech has never been particularly popular in America.

Alessandro turned a grateful look on Ramona as he translated this speech, so in unison with Indian modes of thought and feeling.

And so this is why the clever performer cannot reproduce the effect of a speech of Demosthenes or Daniel Webster.

He said no more in words, but his little blue eyes had an eloquence that left nothing to mere speech.

After pondering over Mr. Blackbird's speech for a few moments he raised his head.

Albinia, I have refrained from speech as long as possible; but this is really too much!

Related Words

More about speech, what is speech .

Speech is the ability to express thoughts and emotions through vocal sounds and gestures. The act of doing this is also known as speech .

Speech is something only humans are capable of doing and this ability has contributed greatly to humanity’s ability to develop civilization. Speech allows humans to communicate much more complex information than animals are able to.

Almost all animals make sounds or noises with the intent to communicate with each other, such as mating calls and yelps of danger. However, animals aren’t actually talking to each other. That is, they aren’t forming sentences or sharing complicated information. Instead, they are making simple noises that trigger another animal’s natural instincts.

While speech does involve making noises, there is a lot more going on than simple grunts and growls. First, humans’ vocal machinery, such as our lungs, throat, vocal chords, and tongue, allows for a wide range of intricate sounds. Second, the human brain is incredibly complex, allowing humans to process vocal sounds and understand combinations of them as words and oral communication. The human brain is essential for speech . While chimpanzees and other apes have vocal organs similar to humans’, their brains are much less advanced and they are unable to learn speech .

Why is speech important?

The first records of the word speech come from before the year 900. It ultimately comes from the Old English word sprecan , meaning “to speak.” Scientists debate on the exact date that humanity first learned to speak, with estimates ranging from 50,000 to 2 million years ago.

Related to the concept of speech is the idea of language . A language is the collection of symbols, sounds, gestures, and anything else that a group of people use to communicate with each other, such as English, Swahili, and American Sign Language . Speech is actually using those things to orally communicate with someone else.

Did you know … ?

But what about birds that “talk”? Parrots in particular are famous for their ability to say human words and sentences. Birds are incapable of speech . What they are actually doing is learning common sounds that humans make and mimicking them. They don’t actually understand what anything they are repeating actually means.

What are real-life examples of speech ?

Speech is essential to human communication.

Dutch is just enough like German that I can read text on signs and screens, but not enough that I can understand speech. — Clark Smith Cox III (@clarkcox) September 8, 2009

I can make squirrels so excited, I could almost swear they understand human speech! — Neil Oliver (@thecoastguy) July 20, 2020

What other words are related to speech ?

• communication
• information

Quiz yourself!

True or False?

Humans are the only animals capable of speech .

• More from M-W
• To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In

Definition of speech

• declamation

Examples of speech in a Sentence

These examples are programmatically compiled from various online sources to illustrate current usage of the word 'speech.' Any opinions expressed in the examples do not represent those of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback about these examples.

Word History

Middle English speche , from Old English sprǣc, spǣc ; akin to Old English sprecan to speak — more at speak

before the 12th century, in the meaning defined at sense 1a

Phrases Containing speech

• acceptance speech
• figure of speech
• freedom of speech
• free speech
• hate speech
• part of speech
• polite speech

speech community

• speech form
• speech impediment
• speech therapy
• stump speech
• visible speech

Dictionary Entries Near speech

Cite this entry.

“Speech.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/speech. Accessed 5 Jun. 2024.

Kids Definition

Kids definition of speech, medical definition, medical definition of speech, legal definition, legal definition of speech, more from merriam-webster on speech.

Nglish: Translation of speech for Spanish Speakers

Britannica English: Translation of speech for Arabic Speakers

Britannica.com: Encyclopedia article about speech

Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!

Can you solve 4 words at once?

Word of the day.

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Popular in Grammar & Usage

More commonly misspelled words, commonly misspelled words, how to use em dashes (—), en dashes (–) , and hyphens (-), absent letters that are heard anyway, how to use accents and diacritical marks, popular in wordplay, the words of the week - may 31, 9 superb owl words, 'gaslighting,' 'woke,' 'democracy,' and other top lookups, 10 words for lesser-known games and sports, etymologies for every day of the week, games & quizzes.

• Dictionaries home
• American English
• Collocations
• German-English
• Grammar home
• Practical English Usage
• Learn & Practise Grammar (Beta)
• Word Lists home
• My Word Lists
• Recent additions
• Resources home
• Text Checker

Definition of speech noun from the Oxford Advanced American Dictionary

Definitions on the go

Look up any word in the dictionary offline, anytime, anywhere with the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary app.

speech in British English

Speech in american english, examples of 'speech' in a sentence speech, cobuild collocations speech, trends of speech.

View usage for: All Years Last 10 years Last 50 years Last 100 years Last 300 years

Browse alphabetically speech

• speech bubble
• speech clinic
• All ENGLISH words that begin with 'S'

Related terms of speech

• cued speech
• free speech
• hate speech
• View more related words

Quick word challenge

Quiz Review

Score: 0 / 5

Wordle Helper

Scrabble Tools

The 9 Parts of Speech: Definitions and Examples

• Ph.D., Rhetoric and English, University of Georgia
• M.A., Modern English and American Literature, University of Leicester
• B.A., English, State University of New York

A part of speech is a term used in traditional grammar for one of the nine main categories into which words are classified according to their functions in sentences, such as nouns or verbs. Also known as word classes, these are the building blocks of grammar.

Every sentence you write or speak in English includes words that fall into some of the nine parts of speech. These include nouns, pronouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, articles/determiners, and interjections. (Some sources include only eight parts of speech and leave interjections in their own category.)

Parts of Speech

• Word types can be divided into nine parts of speech:
• prepositions
• conjunctions
• articles/determiners
• interjections
• Some words can be considered more than one part of speech, depending on context and usage.
• Interjections can form complete sentences on their own.

Learning the names of the parts of speech probably won't make you witty, healthy, wealthy, or wise. In fact, learning just the names of the parts of speech won't even make you a better writer. However, you will gain a basic understanding of sentence structure  and the  English language by familiarizing yourself with these labels.

Open and Closed Word Classes

The parts of speech are commonly divided into  open classes  (nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs) and  closed classes  (pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions, articles/determiners, and interjections). Open classes can be altered and added to as language develops, and closed classes are pretty much set in stone. For example, new nouns are created every day, but conjunctions never change.

In contemporary linguistics , parts of speech are generally referred to as word classes or syntactic categories. The main difference is that word classes are classified according to more strict linguistic criteria. Within word classes, there is the lexical, or open class, and the function, or closed class.

The 9 Parts of Speech

Read about each part of speech below, and practice identifying each.

Nouns are a person, place, thing, or idea. They can take on a myriad of roles in a sentence, from the subject of it all to the object of an action. They are capitalized when they're the official name of something or someone, and they're called proper nouns in these cases. Examples: pirate, Caribbean, ship, freedom, Captain Jack Sparrow.

Pronouns stand in for nouns in a sentence . They are more generic versions of nouns that refer only to people. Examples:​  I, you, he, she, it, ours, them, who, which, anybody, ourselves.

Verbs are action words that tell what happens in a sentence. They can also show a sentence subject's state of being ( is , was ). Verbs change form based on tense (present, past) and count distinction (singular or plural). Examples:  sing, dance, believes, seemed, finish, eat, drink, be, became.

Adjectives describe nouns and pronouns. They specify which one, how much, what kind, and more. Adjectives allow readers and listeners to use their senses to imagine something more clearly. Examples:  hot, lazy, funny, unique, bright, beautiful, poor, smooth.

Adverbs describe verbs, adjectives, and even other adverbs. They specify when, where, how, and why something happened and to what extent or how often. Many adjectives can be turned into adjectives by adding the suffix - ly . Examples:  softly, quickly, lazily, often, only, hopefully, sometimes.

Preposition

Prepositions  show spatial, temporal, and role relations between a noun or pronoun and the other words in a sentence. They come at the start of a prepositional phrase , which contains a preposition and its object. Examples:  up, over, against, by, for, into, close to, out of, apart from.

Conjunction

Conjunctions join words, phrases, and clauses in a sentence. There are coordinating, subordinating, and correlative conjunctions. Examples:  and, but, or, so, yet.

Articles and Determiners

Articles and determiners function like adjectives by modifying nouns, but they are different than adjectives in that they are necessary for a sentence to have proper syntax. Articles and determiners specify and identify nouns, and there are indefinite and definite articles. Examples of articles:  a, an, the ; examples of determiners:  these, that, those, enough, much, few, which, what.

Some traditional grammars have treated articles  as a distinct part of speech. Modern grammars, however, more often include articles in the category of determiners , which identify or quantify a noun. Even though they modify nouns like adjectives, articles are different in that they are essential to the proper syntax of a sentence, just as determiners are necessary to convey the meaning of a sentence, while adjectives are optional.

Interjection

Interjections are expressions that can stand on their own or be contained within sentences. These words and phrases often carry strong emotions and convey reactions. Examples:  ah, whoops, ouch, yabba dabba do!

How to Determine the Part of Speech

Only interjections ( Hooray! ) have a habit of standing alone; every other part of speech must be contained within a sentence and some are even required in sentences (nouns and verbs). Other parts of speech come in many varieties and may appear just about anywhere in a sentence.

To know for sure what part of speech a word falls into, look not only at the word itself but also at its meaning, position, and use in a sentence.

For example, in the first sentence below,  work  functions as a noun; in the second sentence, a verb; and in the third sentence, an adjective:

• Bosco showed up for  work  two hours late.
• The noun  work  is the thing Bosco shows up for.
• He will have to  work  until midnight.
• The verb  work  is the action he must perform.
• His  work  permit expires next month.
• The  attributive noun  (or converted adjective) work  modifies the noun  permit .

Learning the names and uses of the basic parts of speech is just one way to understand how sentences are constructed.

Dissecting Basic Sentences

To form a basic complete sentence, you only need two elements: a noun (or pronoun standing in for a noun) and a verb. The noun acts as a subject, and the verb, by telling what action the subject is taking, acts as the predicate. 

In the short sentence above,  birds  is the noun and  fly  is the verb. The sentence makes sense and gets the point across.

You can have a sentence with just one word without breaking any sentence formation rules. The short sentence below is complete because it's a verb command with an understood "you" noun.

Here, the pronoun, standing in for a noun, is implied and acts as the subject. The sentence is really saying, "(You) go!"

Constructing More Complex Sentences

Use more parts of speech to add additional information about what's happening in a sentence to make it more complex. Take the first sentence from above, for example, and incorporate more information about how and why birds fly.

• Birds fly when migrating before winter.

Birds and fly remain the noun and the verb, but now there is more description. 

When  is an adverb that modifies the verb fly.  The word before  is a little tricky because it can be either a conjunction, preposition, or adverb depending on the context. In this case, it's a preposition because it's followed by a noun. This preposition begins an adverbial phrase of time ( before winter ) that answers the question of when the birds migrate . Before is not a conjunction because it does not connect two clauses.

• A List of Exclamations and Interjections in English
• Sentence Parts and Sentence Structures
• 100 Key Terms Used in the Study of Grammar
• Closed Class Words
• Word Class in English Grammar
• Prepositional Phrases in English Grammar
• Foundations of Grammar in Italian
• The Top 25 Grammatical Terms
• What Are the Parts of a Prepositional Phrase?
• Open Class Words in English Grammar
• What Is an Adverb in English Grammar?
• Definition and Examples of Function Words in English
• Telegraphic Speech
• Sentence Patterns
• Pronoun Definition and Examples
• Lesson Plan: Label Sentences with Parts of Speech

Skip to main navigation

• Email Updates
• Federal Court Finder

What Does Free Speech Mean?

Among other cherished values, the First Amendment protects freedom of speech. The U.S. Supreme Court often has struggled to determine what exactly constitutes protected speech. The following are examples of speech, both direct (words) and symbolic (actions), that the Court has decided are either entitled to First Amendment protections, or not.

The First Amendment states, in relevant part, that:

“Congress shall make no law...abridging freedom of speech.”

Freedom of speech includes the right:

• Not to speak (specifically, the right not to salute the flag). West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette , 319 U.S. 624 (1943).
• Of students to wear black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”). Tinker v. Des Moines , 393 U.S. 503 (1969).
• To use certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages. Cohen v. California , 403 U.S. 15 (1971).
• To contribute money (under certain circumstances) to political campaigns. Buckley v. Valeo , 424 U.S. 1 (1976).
• To advertise commercial products and professional services (with some restrictions). Virginia Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Consumer Council , 425 U.S. 748 (1976);  Bates v. State Bar of Arizona , 433 U.S. 350 (1977).
• To engage in symbolic speech, (e.g., burning the flag in protest). Texas v. Johnson , 491 U.S. 397 (1989);  United States v. Eichman , 496 U.S. 310 (1990).

Freedom of speech does not include the right:

• To incite imminent lawless action. Brandenburg v. Ohio , 395 U.S. 444 (1969).
• To make or distribute obscene materials. Roth v. United States , 354 U.S. 476 (1957).
• To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest. United States v. O’Brien , 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
• To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration.  Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier , 484 U.S. 260 (1988).
• Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event. Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser , 478 U.S. 675 (1986).
• Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event. Morse v. Frederick, __ U.S. __ (2007).

Disclaimer: These resources are created by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts for use in educational activities only. They may not reflect the current state of the law, and are not intended to provide legal advice, guidance on litigation, or commentary on legislation. 

DISCLAIMER: These resources are created by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts for educational purposes only. They may not reflect the current state of the law, and are not intended to provide legal advice, guidance on litigation, or commentary on any pending case or legislation.

•   Interventions
•   Drug Encyclopaedia
•   Bookmarks
•    
• Sign Up Now Already have an account?
• Search MedSchool
•   Discover
•   Guides History, exam, tests, drugs and interventions
•   History
•   Examination
•   Investigations
•   Drugs
•   Encyclopaedia Diseases, symptoms, signs and drugs
•   Diseases
•   Symptoms
•   Clinical Signs
•   Test Findings
•   Study Quizzes and flashcards
•   Optimise
•   Quizzes
•   My Flashcards
•   Calculators
• Examination
• Mental Status Exam

Assessing Speech

Causes of abnormal speech.

• Psychiatric disorder - mood disorder, anxiety, schizophrenia
• Confusion - delirium, dementia, intellectual disability
• Dysphasia / aphasia
• Dysarthria - stroke, brain injury, Parkinson's, MS
• Dysphonia - laryngitis, neuropathology, trauma, mass, atrophy, systemic disease
• Hearing impairment
• English as a non-native language
• Intoxication

Rate of Speech

Interpretation.

• Slow speech (bradylalia) Depression, Parkinson's disease, cognitive impairment
• Normal speech rate
• Rapid speech (tachylalia) - fast speech but able to be redirected Normal, mania, anxiety, stimulants
• Pressured speech - fast and without taking breaks, talking over other people and unable to be redirected Mania, anxiety

Volume of Speech

• Loud (hyperphonia) Personality trait, hearing impairment, mania
• Normal speech volume
• Weak (hypophonia) - low or soft speech Shyness, anxiety, depression, Parkinson's disease

Quantity of Speech

• Excessive talking (logorrhoea) - speaking at length and apparently without end Mania, ADHD, anxiety
• Talkative - actively takes part in conversation. Normal
• Poverty of speech - very little speech, even with persuasion. Shyness, depression, schizophrenia, cognitive impairment

Examples of Dysfluency

• Stuttering - repetition, prolongation, or pauses in speech May be developmental, neurogenic, or psychogenic
• Cluttering - rapid, disorganized speech with excessive word and phrase repetitions Often related to language or learning disabilities

Causes of Impaired Speech Fluency

• Foreign language
• Expressive - varied pitch and intonation Normal tonality
• Monotone - the patient uses a single tone for vocal expression. Boredom, depression, schizophrenia, autism spectrum disorder
• Your electronic clinical medicine handbook
• Guides to help pass your exams
• Tools every medical student needs
• Quick diagrams to have the answers, fast
• Quizzes to test your knowledge

Snapshot: Initialising...

When do you use quotation marks (‘ ’) or (“ ”) in English? - Easy Learning Grammar

Direct speech.

• to draw attention to a word
• to indicate an unusual use of a word
• to suggest that the writer want to be distanced from a word.

Quick word challenge

Quiz Review

Score: 0 / 5

• Cambridge Dictionary +Plus

Meaning of speech in English

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

speech noun ( SAY WORDS )

• She suffers from a speech defect .
• From her slow , deliberate speech I guessed she must be drunk .
• Freedom of speech and freedom of thought were both denied under the dictatorship .
• As a child , she had some speech problems .
• We use these aids to develop speech in small children .
• a problem shared is a problem halved idiom
• banteringly
• bull session
• chew the fat idiom
• conversation
• conversational
• put the world to rights idiom
• take/lead someone on/to one side idiom
• tête-à-tête

You can also find related words, phrases, and synonyms in the topics:

speech noun ( FORMAL TALK )

• talk She will give a talk on keeping kids safe on the internet.
• lecture The lecture is entitled "War and the Modern American Presidency".
• presentation We were given a presentation of progress made to date.
• speech You might have to make a speech when you accept the award.
• address He took the oath of office then delivered his inaugural address.
• oration It was to become one of the most famous orations in American history.
• Her speech was received with cheers and a standing ovation .
• She closed the meeting with a short speech.
• The vicar's forgetting his lines in the middle of the speech provided some good comedy .
• Her speech caused outrage among the gay community .
• She concluded the speech by reminding us of our responsibility .
• call for papers
• deliver a speech
• maiden speech
• presentation
• public speaking
• talk at someone

speech | American Dictionary

Speech noun ( talking ), examples of speech, collocations with speech.

These are words often used in combination with speech .

Click on a collocation to see more examples of it.

Translations of speech

Get a quick, free translation!

Word of the Day

aerobic exercise

Aerobic exercise improves the body's ability to use oxygen.

Keeping up appearances (Talking about how things seem)

Learn more with +Plus

• Recent and Recommended {{#preferredDictionaries}} {{name}} {{/preferredDictionaries}}
• Definitions Clear explanations of natural written and spoken English English Learner’s Dictionary Essential British English Essential American English
• Grammar and thesaurus Usage explanations of natural written and spoken English Grammar Thesaurus
• Pronunciation British and American pronunciations with audio English Pronunciation
• English–Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Simplified)–English
• English–Chinese (Traditional) Chinese (Traditional)–English
• English–Dutch Dutch–English
• English–French French–English
• English–German German–English
• English–Indonesian Indonesian–English
• English–Italian Italian–English
• English–Japanese Japanese–English
• English–Norwegian Norwegian–English
• English–Polish Polish–English
• English–Portuguese Portuguese–English
• English–Spanish Spanish–English
• English–Swedish Swedish–English
• Dictionary +Plus Word Lists
• speech (SAY WORDS)
• speech (FORMAL TALK)
• speech (TALKING)
• Collocations
• Translations
• All translations

To add speech to a word list please sign up or log in.

Add speech to one of your lists below, or create a new one.

{{message}}

Something went wrong.

There was a problem sending your report.

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

Freedom of Speech

By: History.com Editors

Updated: July 27, 2023 | Original: December 4, 2017

Freedom of speech—the right to express opinions without government restraint—is a democratic ideal that dates back to ancient Greece. In the United States, the First Amendment guarantees free speech, though the United States, like all modern democracies, places limits on this freedom. In a series of landmark cases, the U.S. Supreme Court over the years has helped to define what types of speech are—and aren’t—protected under U.S. law.

The ancient Greeks pioneered free speech as a democratic principle. The ancient Greek word “parrhesia” means “free speech,” or “to speak candidly.” The term first appeared in Greek literature around the end of the fifth century B.C.

During the classical period, parrhesia became a fundamental part of the democracy of Athens. Leaders, philosophers, playwrights and everyday Athenians were free to openly discuss politics and religion and to criticize the government in some settings.

First Amendment

In the United States, the First Amendment protects freedom of speech.

The First Amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights—the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution . The Bill of Rights provides constitutional protection for certain individual liberties, including freedoms of speech, assembly and worship.

The First Amendment doesn’t specify what exactly is meant by freedom of speech. Defining what types of speech should and shouldn’t be protected by law has fallen largely to the courts.

In general, the First Amendment guarantees the right to express ideas and information. On a basic level, it means that people can express an opinion (even an unpopular or unsavory one) without fear of government censorship.

It protects all forms of communication, from speeches to art and other media.

Flag Burning

While freedom of speech pertains mostly to the spoken or written word, it also protects some forms of symbolic speech. Symbolic speech is an action that expresses an idea.

Flag burning is an example of symbolic speech that is protected under the First Amendment. Gregory Lee Johnson, a youth communist, burned a flag during the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas to protest the Reagan administration.

The U.S. Supreme Court , in 1990, reversed a Texas court’s conviction that Johnson broke the law by desecrating the flag. Texas v. Johnson invalidated statutes in Texas and 47 other states prohibiting flag burning.

When Isn’t Speech Protected?

Not all speech is protected under the First Amendment.

Forms of speech that aren’t protected include:

• Obscene material such as child pornography
• Plagiarism of copyrighted material
• Defamation (libel and slander)
• True threats

Speech inciting illegal actions or soliciting others to commit crimes aren’t protected under the First Amendment, either.

The Supreme Court decided a series of cases in 1919 that helped to define the limitations of free speech. Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917, shortly after the United States entered into World War I . The law prohibited interference in military operations or recruitment.

Socialist Party activist Charles Schenck was arrested under the Espionage Act after he distributed fliers urging young men to dodge the draft. The Supreme Court upheld his conviction by creating the “clear and present danger” standard, explaining when the government is allowed to limit free speech. In this case, they viewed draft resistant as dangerous to national security.

American labor leader and Socialist Party activist Eugene Debs also was arrested under the Espionage Act after giving a speech in 1918 encouraging others not to join the military. Debs argued that he was exercising his right to free speech and that the Espionage Act of 1917 was unconstitutional. In Debs v. United States the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Espionage Act.

Freedom of Expression

The Supreme Court has interpreted artistic freedom broadly as a form of free speech.

In most cases, freedom of expression may be restricted only if it will cause direct and imminent harm. Shouting “fire!” in a crowded theater and causing a stampede would be an example of direct and imminent harm.

In deciding cases involving artistic freedom of expression the Supreme Court leans on a principle called “content neutrality.” Content neutrality means the government can’t censor or restrict expression just because some segment of the population finds the content offensive.

Free Speech in Schools

In 1965, students at a public high school in Des Moines, Iowa , organized a silent protest against the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands to protest the fighting. The students were suspended from school. The principal argued that the armbands were a distraction and could possibly lead to danger for the students.

The Supreme Court didn’t bite—they ruled in favor of the students’ right to wear the armbands as a form of free speech in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District . The case set the standard for free speech in schools. However, First Amendment rights typically don’t apply in private schools.

What does free speech mean?; United States Courts . Tinker v. Des Moines; United States Courts . Freedom of expression in the arts and entertainment; ACLU .

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

What does freedom of speech mean in the internet era?

More than two-thirds of the world is using the internet, a lot. Image:  REUTERS/Fred Prouser

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} John Letzing

.chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} Explore and monitor how .chakra .wef-15eoq1r{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;color:#F7DB5E;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-15eoq1r{font-size:1.125rem;}} Media, Entertainment and Sport is affecting economies, industries and global issues

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:, media, entertainment and sport.

• The US Supreme Court is weighing in on whether social media sites can be compelled to include all viewpoints no matter how objectionable.
• The high court’s decision could have a broad impact on how the internet is experienced.
• Its deliberations raise questions about regulation, freedom of speech and what makes for a healthy and equitable online existence.

In 1996, a man in South Africa locked himself into a glass cubicle and mostly limited his contact with the outside world to an internet connection for a few months . “The exciting aspect is realizing just how similar we all are in this growing global village,” he gushed to a reporter on the verge of his release.

What was an oddball stunt 28 years ago now verges on a rough description of daily existence. When Richard Weideman locked himself into that cubicle to stare at a screen all day, only about 1% of the global population was online, and social media was mostly limited to the 5,000 or so members of the WELL, an early virtual community. Now, more than two-thirds of the world is using the internet, a lot – and the global village is not in great shape .

The US Supreme Court is currently attempting to sort out exactly how internet discourse should be experienced. Are YouTube, Facebook and TikTok places where top-down decisions should continue to be made on what to publish and what to exclude? Or, are they more akin to a postal service that’s obliged to convey all views, no matter how unseemly?

By weighing in on two state laws mandating that kind of forced inclusion, the high court could end up ensuring free expression by erasing editorial guardrails – and the average scroll through social media might never be quite the same. A decision is expected by June .

This potential inflection point comes as just about everyone and their grandparents are now very online. Not participating doesn’t seem like an option anymore. “The modern public square” is one way to describe it. Oral arguments before the Supreme Court have surfaced other analogies , like a book shop, or a parade.

Excluding people from marching in your parade might seem unfair. But, it's your parade.

More than a century ago, a Supreme Court justice made his own analogy : speech that doesn’t merit protection is the type that creates a clear and present danger, like falsely shouting “fire” in a crowded theater.

“Shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater” has since become a shopworn way to describe anything deemed to cross the free-speech line.

As it turns out, falsely shouting “fire” in crowded places had actually been a real thing that people did in the years before it showed up in a Supreme Court opinion. In 1911, at an opera house in the state of Pennsylvania, it resulted in dozens of people people being fatally crushed; another incident two years later in Michigan killed far more.

More recently, social media services banned certain political messaging because they believed it had also fatally incited people under false pretenses.

Those bans prompted reactive laws in Florida and Texas, triggering the current Supreme Court proceeding. The Texas legislation prohibits social media companies with big audiences from barring users over their viewpoints. The broader Florida law also forbids such deplatforming, and zeroes in on the practice of shadow banning .

That particular form of surreptitious censoring isn’t confined to the US, even if many popular social media services are headquartered there. The EU’s Digital Services Act, approved in 2022, is meant to prohibit shadow banning. In India, users trying to broach touchy subjects online have alleged that it’s happened. And in Mexico, some critics have actually advocated for more shadow banning of criminal cartels.

‘A euphemism for censorship’

In 1969, computer scientists in California established the first network connection via the precursor to the modern internet. They managed to send the initial two letters of a five-letter message from a refrigerator-sized machine at the University of California, Los Angeles, before the system crashed. Things progressed quickly from there.

In 2006, Google blew a lot of minds by paying nearly $1.7 billion for YouTube – an astounding price for something widely considered a repository for pirated content and cat videos.

By 2019, YouTube was earning a bit more than $15 billion in ad revenue annually, and had a monthly global audience of 2 billion users. It’s now at the crux of a debate with far-reaching implications; if the Florida and Texas laws are upheld by the Supreme Court, the site would likely have a much harder time barring hateful content, if it could at all.

That might be just fine for some people. One Supreme Court justice wondered during oral arguments whether the content moderation currently employed by YouTube and others is just “a euphemism for censorship.”

In some ways, we’ve already had at least a partial test run of unleashing a broader range of views on a social media channel. When it was still called Twitter, the site banned political ads due to concerns about spreading misinformation, and even banned a former US president. Now, as “X,” it’s reinstated both .

According to one recent analysis , X’s political center of gravity shifted notably after coming under new ownership in late 2022, mostly by design . The response has been mixed; sharp declines in downloads of the app and usage have been reported.

Government intervention to force that kind of recalibration, or to mandate any kind of content moderation decisions, would likely be unpopular. X, for example, has challenged a law passed in California in 2022 requiring social media companies to self-report the moderation decisions they’re making. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has called that law an informal censorship scheme .

Pundits seem skeptical that the Supreme Court will let the state laws requiring blanket viewpoint inclusion stand. During oral arguments, the court’s chief justice asked whether the government should really be forcing a "modern public square" run by private companies to publish anything. An attorney suggested the result might be so disruptive that, at least until they can figure out how to best proceed, some sites might consider narrowing their focus to “nothing but content about puppies.”

Workarounds are already available to some people who feel overlooked online. Starting an entirely new social media site of their own, for example . Or, if they happen to be among the richest people in the world, maybe buying one that’s already gained a huge audience.

Neither option is very realistic for most of us. And there may be a legitimate case to be made that ubiquitous platforms do sometimes unfairly marginalize certain voices.

(It's also possible that “content about puppies” would be preferable to what’s often available now).

Ultimately, no sweeping legal remedy may be at hand. Instead, we'll likely remain in an uneasy middle ground that only becomes more bewildering as artificial intelligence spreads – mostly relying on algorithm-induced familiarity , maybe wondering if it’s social-media ineptitude or shadow banning that’s keeping us from getting the attention we deserve, and not infrequently stepping out of our online comfort zone to steal a glimpse of something jarring.

More reading on freedom of expression online

For more context, here are links to further reading from the World Economic Forum's Strategic Intelligence platform :

• “The US Supreme Court Holds the Future of the Internet in its Hands.” The headline says it all. ( Wired )
• This pole dancer won an apology from Instagram for blocking hashtags she and her peers had been using “in error,” then proceeded to publish an academic study on shadow banning. ( The Conversation )
• “Social media paints an alarmingly detailed picture.” Sometimes people don’t want to be seen and heard online, particularly if asked for their social media identifiers when applying for a visa, according to this piece. ( EFF )
• “From Hashtags to Hush-Tags.” The removal of victims’ online content in conflict zones plays in favor of regimes committing atrocities, according to this analysis. ( The Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy )
• Have you heard the conspiracy theory about a “deep state” plot involving a pop megastar dating a professional American football player? According to an expert cited in this piece, it’s just more evidence of our current era of “evidence maximalism.” ( The Atlantic )
• Everyone seems pretty certain that internet discourse has negatively affected behavior, politics, and society – but according to this piece, truly rigorous studies of these effects (and responsible media coverage of those studies) are rarer than you might think. ( LSE )
• One thing social media services don’t appear to have issues with publishing: recruitment campaigns for intelligence agencies, according to this piece. ( RUSI )

On the Strategic Intelligence platform, you can find feeds of expert analysis related to Media , Law , Digital Communications , and hundreds of additional topics. You’ll need to register to view.

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

The Agenda .chakra .wef-n7bacu{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-weight:400;} Weekly

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

.chakra .wef-1dtnjt5{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;} More on Industries in Depth .chakra .wef-17xejub{-webkit-flex:1;-ms-flex:1;flex:1;justify-self:stretch;-webkit-align-self:stretch;-ms-flex-item-align:stretch;align-self:stretch;} .chakra .wef-nr1rr4{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;white-space:normal;vertical-align:middle;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:0.75rem;border-radius:0.25rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;line-height:1.2;-webkit-letter-spacing:1.25px;-moz-letter-spacing:1.25px;-ms-letter-spacing:1.25px;letter-spacing:1.25px;background:none;padding:0px;color:#B3B3B3;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;}@media screen and (min-width:37.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:0.875rem;}}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:1rem;}} See all

The energy transition could shift the global power centre. This expert explains why

Liam Coleman

June 4, 2024

Top 5 countries leading the sustainable tourism sector

Robot rock stars, pocket forests, and the battle for chips - Forum podcasts you should hear this month

Robin Pomeroy and Linda Lacina

April 29, 2024

Agritech: Shaping Agriculture in Emerging Economies, Today and Tomorrow

Confused about AI? Here are the podcasts you need on artificial intelligence

Robin Pomeroy

April 25, 2024

Which technologies will enable a cleaner steel industry?

Daniel Boero Vargas and Mandy Chan

“A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand”: Deciphering Lincoln’s Warning About Civil War

By tim brinkhof | may 30, 2024.

On June 16, 1858, a beardless Abraham Lincoln took the stage at the Illinois State Capitol in Springfield to formally accept his nomination for U.S. senator on behalf of the state’s freshly formed Republican Party. 

In a short speech whose fame might rival that of the Gettysburg Address , the future president warned the “gentlemen of the Convention” that the country’s divided stance on slavery could only lead to civil war. 

“‘A house divided against itself cannot stand,’” Lincoln declared . “I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.”

These prophetic words come from the Book of Matthew in the New Testament, in which Jesus informs the Pharisees that “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand.” They now rank among the most iconic in the history of American politics . 

But while the phrase has since been quoted by countless politicians in and outside the U.S., and went on to inspire popular TV shows like HBO’s House of the Dragon (which also revolves around a civil war), its original meaning is not as obvious as one might think.

What “A House Divided” Really Means

A common misconception about the House Divided speech is that Lincoln believed the Union would destroy itself as a result of its inability to regulate the spread of slavery. This is not the case, however. “I do not expect the Union to be dissolved,” Lincoln stressed. “I do not expect the house to fall—but I do expect it will cease to be divided.”

Cessation would come through civil war: a resolve by Northern and Southern leaders to settle through combat what they could not agree on in conversation. A succession of ineffective and hotly contested laws—including the 1820 Missouri Compromise , which outlawed slavery in parts of the recently acquired Louisiana Territory , among other actions—indicated to Lincoln that the pro-slavery elements of U.S. society could not coexist under the same roof as abolitionist elements. 

If the house—the Union—was to remain intact, one side had to subjugate the other. 

In 1858, three years before Confederate troops opened fire on Fort Sumter in the harbor of Charleston, South Carolina, Lincoln did not yet know which side would ultimately emerge victorious. Still, he knew there could only be one successor. 

“Either the opponents of slavery, will arrest the further spread of it,” the future president proclaimed, “and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new—North as well as South.”

In addition to formulating a vision of the future, Lincoln’s House Divided speech takes aim at his senatorial rival, the incumbent Democrat Stephen Douglas. Whereas Lincoln advocated for federal control over the spread of slavery, thus maintaining the balance of power outlined by the Missouri Compromise, Douglas championed popular sovereignty, the idea that new territories should be able to decide for themselves whether slavery would be legal within their borders. 

Lincoln’s thoughts on popular sovereignty—a system which, it should be noted, only took into account the votes of white, landowning men—were greatly influenced by the Dred Scott decision , the outcome of a case brought to the U.S. Supreme Court a year prior. Scott and his wife Harriet, an enslaved Black couple, sued for freedom when their enslavers took them from Missouri, a state where slavery was legal, to Illinois, a place where it was not. 

When the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Scott’s enslavers, it essentially opened the door for Southern slaveholders to take people they enslaved into free territories. This move convinced Lincoln that the balance of powers could not be maintained, and that the entire U.S. would soon end up either permitting slavery or outlawing it altogether. 

“We shall lie down pleasantly dreaming that the people of Missouri are on the verge of making their state free,” he declared, referencing both Scott and Douglas, “and we shall awake to the reality, instead, that the Supreme Court has made Illinois a slave State.”

Lincoln’s Legacy

Although Lincoln lost the senatorial race to Douglas, his House Divided speech, and the equally publicized Lincoln-Douglas debates that followed paved the way for Lincoln’s successful presidential campaign in 1860. Running against Unionist John Bell and Southern Democrat John C. Breckenridge, the more charismatic and well-versed Lincoln won the White House with 180 electoral votes—dwarfing the 12 procured by Douglas, who also ran for office on the Northern Democratic ticket.

Lincoln’s oratorial eloquence was rivaled only by his clairvoyance. As foretold, the U.S. readily descended into civil war after his inauguration, resulting in the abolition of chattel slavery following the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment in 1865. 

At the same time, one could argue that Lincoln’s house remained divided. Following the Civil War , former enslavers obstructed Reconstruction-era policymaking in the South. Instead of properly integrating formerly enslaved people into society, new structures were put in place to prolong their systemic oppression. These means ranged from sharecropping—a form of servitude that differed from antebellum slavery only in name—to racial segregation, a policy that continued until the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s.

As a democracy with only two consequential political parties, the U.S. has repeatedly teetered on the edge of civil unrest. When tensions flare , commentators and candidates regularly echo Lincoln’s famous words. Now, all they need to do is listen to them.

Read More Stories About Famous Quotations:

How Trump’s guilty verdict will impact the 2024 presidential election

Scandals have swirled around former President Donald Trump since his first presidential campaign in 2016. But as of Thursday — having been found guilty on all counts in his New York hush-money case — he is now officially a convicted felon. Could that fact cut through all the other headlines and be a game-changer for the 2024 election?

At first glance, there's some evidence from polls that this conviction will meaningfully erode Trump's support. An April survey from CNN/SSRS found that, while 76 percent of Trump supporters said they would support Trump regardless, 24 percent said they "might reconsider" their support for him if he was convicted. And a May poll from Emerson College found that 25 percent of voters said a guilty verdict in New York would make them less likely to vote for Trump.

A few pollsters have also asked two versions of the standard "who will you vote for?" question in recent weeks : one straightforward one, and one that asked respondents who they would vote for if Trump was convicted in the New York case. On average, Trump went from leading by 1 percentage point in these polls without considering the conviction to trailing by 6 points with it.

But Democrats would be wise to not get too excited about these numbers. Take another look at the wording of the CNN/SSRS poll: Twenty-four percent of Trump supporters said they "might reconsider" their vote. That's not the same as "will definitely change" their vote! In light of this conviction, many Trump supporters might simply have a crisis of confidence about their vote without outright switching to President Joe Biden.

That's basically what another poll from ABC News/Ipsos found. Like CNN/SSRS, they asked Trump supporters what they would do if Trump was convicted in the New York case, but they provided options for both "reconsider" and "no longer support." Sixteen percent said they would reconsider supporting Trump, but only 4 percent said they would no longer support him. (Similar to CNN/SSRS, 80 percent said they would continue to support him.)

Likewise, you should always be careful with polls like Emerson's that ask Americans whether something makes them more or less likely to vote a certain way. Respondents often don't take these questions literally ; instead, they use them as a proxy for whether they approve or disapprove of the thing being asked about.

Indeed, over three-quarters of those who told Emerson a conviction would make them "less likely" to vote for Trump had told the pollster on a different question that they were already voting for Biden. By contrast, only 11 percent of Trump voters said a guilty verdict would make them less likely to vote for him — so the potential impact on his actual support is much smaller than it initially appears.

Other polls also support the theory that this conviction won't cause mass defections to Biden. Those horse-race polls I cited above? They don't actually show many Trump voters switching their vote to Biden. Instead, most of the support Trump loses goes into the undecided column or to an unnamed, hypothetical "someone else":

On average, Trump loses 6 points of support after a conviction is taken into account — but Biden gains only 1 point. "Someone else" or undecided gains 5 points. That's consistent with the idea that this conviction will make some Trump supporters squeamish about the idea of pulling the lever for him, so they will stop identifying as Trump supporters for a while — but most of them won't go so far as to vote for Biden.

And that, in turn, could indicate that this drop in Trump's support will be short-lived. Sure, Trump supporters who abandon him after this conviction could conceivably abstain from voting or vote for a third-party candidate. But the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, so there's also a good chance that they will eventually get over their discomfort and return to Trump's side, especially considering there are still five months left until Election Day — plenty of time for Trump to spin a narrative that helps voters overcome any hangups about voting for a convicted felon.

We don't need to search far for a precedent for this. In October 2016, Trump's campaign was blindsided by the infamous "Access Hollywood" tape, on which Trump bragged about sexually assaulting women. Polls at the time showed that the tape made some Republicans uncomfortable about supporting Trump , and his national support in 538's polling average at the time fell by about 1 point. But Trump's support quickly recovered: Within three weeks of the tape's release, he was polling better than he was before it.

That said, even if most Trump defectors only switch to undecided and eventually return to the fold, that doesn't mean the conviction will have zero effect on the race. That average 1-point gain for Biden isn't nothing — in a close race (which 2024 is shaping up to be), it could mean the difference between winning and losing. But it's also important not to overstate the conviction's impact. If the hush-money trial ends up determining the presidential race, it will likely be because the campaign was a game of inches anyway.

Irena Li contributed research.

Donald Trump found guilty on all counts in historic NY hush money trial: Recap

In a verdict that shook the 2024 presidential campaign, former President Donald Trump was found guilty on all 34 counts in his New York criminal hush money trial . He was convicted of falsifying business records to hide a hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 presidential election. Trump is the first former U.S. president convicted of a crime.  

Prosecutors charged Trump with falsifying business records. They alleged Trump falsified the records to conceal unlawfully interfering in the 2016 presidential election through the $130,000 hush money payment, making the falsification charges felonies. The crime carries a penalty of up to four years in prison, with sentencing scheduled for July 11, but legal experts previously told USA TODAY the presumptive Republican nominee is likely to get only probation or a shorter sentence .

Trump called the outcome a "disgrace" and vowed to keep fighting his conviction.

The more-than six weeks-long trial against the presumptive Republican presidential nominee − which featured dramatic clashes between lawyers and witnesses, the judge and Trump − was the first criminal trial in U.S. history against a former president.

Trump's conviction marks another historic moment, with an uncertain impact on the 2024 presidential election. He is not disqualified from running for office and while polls have suggested a conviction would harm his prospects, prominent Republican supporters quickly rallied to his side.

Prep for the polls: See who is running for president and compare where they stand on key issues in our Voter Guide

Follow along with USA TODAY's live coverage here:

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg: 'I did my job'

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said he did not have any response to Donald Trump’s repeated attacks on the prosecutor and his staff, but he praised his office.

“I did my job. Our job is to follow the facts and the law without fear or favor. That’s exactly what we did here,” Bragg said. “I did my job. We did our job. Many voices out there. The only voice that matters is the voice of the jury and the jury has spoken.”

− Bart Jansen

Will Donald Trump go to jail?

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg dodged a question about whether he would seek jail time when Trump is sentenced July 11.

“We will speak at that time,” Bragg said.

Bragg also declined to say whether he would oppose a request from Trump to remain free while he appeals the verdict. Bragg said prosecutors would respond formally at sentencing July 11.

“I’m going to let our words in court speak for themselves,” Bragg said.

Trump still faces criminal prosecution in these other three cases

With Donald Trump guilty on all charges in his Manhattan hush money trial, he still faces criminal charges in three other cases, including two for allegedly trying to illegally steal the 2020 election he lost to President Joe Biden.

In all, Trump faced a combined 88 criminal counts, including the 34 in Manhattan that he was convicted of Thursday by a jury. That leaves 54 counts between the three other cases, two of them in federal court that were brought by special counsel Jack Smith on behalf of the Justice Department.

One of those involves the retention of classified documents. The other federal case overseen by Smith accuses Trump of trying to subvert the 2020 election results.

The fourth case, in Fulton County, Ga., accuses Trump and 14 co-defendants − including some of his former lawyers, and administration aides − of trying to overturn Trump's loss in the Peach State in 2020.

Trump has pleaded not guilty in all of the cases. None of them have trial dates scheduled, and legal experts largely concur that it's unlikely that any will begin before election day on Nov. 5, a likely rematch between Biden and Trump as the presumptive Republican nominee.

  −Josh Meyer

Watch DA Alvin Bragg's press conference live

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg Jr. will hold a press conference Thursday evening following the  conviction of Donald Trump.

The press conference is scheduled to be held at 6:30 p.m. ET at the 8th Floor Training Room in New York, the DA's office said in a release.

You can watch his comments live here.

− Anthony Robledo

What was Trump found guilty of?

Trump was found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records.

Each count is tied to a different business record that prosecutors argued Trump was responsible for changing in order to either conceal or commit another crime .

Those records include 11 checks paid to former lawyer  Michael Cohen , 11 invoices from Cohen and 12 entries in Trump's ledgers.

The jury found that Trump authorized a plan to reimburse Cohen for the $130,000 hush money payment issued to  Stormy Daniels and spread the payments across 12 months disguised as legal expenses.

− Kinsey Crowley

'Trump is in a deep hole here': Former federal prosecutor reacts to verdict

Kevin O’Brien, a former federal prosecutor now practicing at Ford O’Brien Landy, said Trump could appeal whether the evidence was sufficient to convict him . But Trump can no longer challenge the credibility of witnesses such as former lawyer Michael Cohen and porn actress Stormy Daniels because the jury believed them, O’Brien said.

“Trump is in a deep hole here,” O’Brien said. “It’s not like he gets to start over. That’s not how the appeal system works.”

The jury weighed the evidence and decided that witnesses such as former lawyer Michael Cohen and porn actress Stormy Daniels were credible.

The counts each carry maximum sentences of four years, but legal experts say Judge Juan Merchan could give him probation or a shorter sentence as a first-time offender to a non-violent offense. The felony convictions don’t prohibit Trump from campaigning or potentially winning the White House.

“He could still easily wind up president of the United States,” O’Brien said. “There’s nothing that would prevent that from happening.”

Can Trump run for president now?

Yes, even after being convicted on felony counts, the Thursday verdict does not impact Donald Trump's ability to seek another term in the White House. The Constitution is pretty clear − here are the qualifications to serve as president.

• Be a natural-born citizen of the U.S.
• Have lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years
• Be at least 35 years old

− Marina Pitofsky

What happens to Trump now? Trump sentencing date

Judge Juan Merchan has scheduled Trump's sentencing for July 11, and Trump is out free until then.

Because this is Trump's first felony offense, his sentence is likely to be as light as probation or home confinement. If he does receive a sentence , it would probably be less than a year.

Trump is likely to appeal the conviction. That would push any jailtime until after the election.

− Kinsey Crowley  

Who were the key witnesses in Donald Trump's historic trial

Former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen was a significant witness testifying that he submitted invoices for “legal expenses” that Trump knew were to reimburse him for paying $130,000 to silence porn actress Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election. But Trump lawyer Todd Blanche accused Cohen of lying on the stand when he testified he notified Trump about the payment to Daniels. In closing arguments, Blanche called Cohenthe “MVP of liars” and “the embodiment of reasonable doubt.” 

Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, described the alleged sexual encounter in enough detail that Merchan questioned why defense lawyers didn’t object more to block her testimony. Trump has repeatedly denied he had sex with Daniels and Blanche argued the payment “started out as an extortion” whether the allegation was true or not. 

David Pecker, the former CEO of American Media Inc., which owned the National Enquirer, said he agreed in a meeting with Trump and Cohen in August 2015 to be the “eyes and ears” of Trump’s presidential campaign to buy negative stories about the candidate and never publish them. 

Pecker acknowledged paying former Playboy model Karen McDougal $150,000 for her story and then refusing to pay for Daniels because Trump hadn’t reimbursed him. Cohen provided a recording , which prosecutor Joshua Steinglass called “jaw-dropping,” of Trump mentioning the $150,000 figure. 

Can Trump go to prison?

Yes. Each felony count of falsifying business records − elevated to a felony because prosecutors proved their purpose was to commit or conceal another crime − carries a maximum sentence of four years. However, New York caps such sentencing the type of felonies Trump faced – Class E felonies –  at 20 years .

But given Trump doesn't have a criminal record and wasn't convicted of a violent crime, such a high sentence is very unlikely, according to legal experts. Several spoke to USA TODAY ahead of the trial about what could happen if Trump were convicted. Nearly all predicted that, if convicted, Trump would get a sentence ranging from just probation to up to four years in prison, and likely falling within the lower end of that range.

− Aysha Bagchi

Donald Trump reacts to guilty verdict

Donald Trump quickly reacted to the jury's decision finding him guilty on all 34 criminal counts.

“This is just a disgrace,” Trump told reporters in the hallway outside the courtroom. “We didn’t do anything wrong. I’m an innocent man.”

Trump ignored shouted questions about whether he would drop out of the presidential campaign.

“This is long from over,” Trump said. “We’ll keep fighting. We’ll fight to the end and we’ll win.”

People surrounding courthouse react

Outside the courthouse, anti-Trump demonstrators cheered and drivers honked their horns as news of the guilty verdicts spread. “Guilty!” several people shouted out.

− David Jackson

Jury reaches a verdict

The jury has reached a verdict in former President Donald Trump 's New York criminal hush money trial , which centers on allegations that he falsified business records to hide a hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

Jurors confirmed that they had reached a verdict in a note signed by the foreperson at 4:20 p.m. local time. Jurors have requested an extra 30 minutes to fill out forms and take other steps, according to Judge Juan Merchan .

The former president, his attorneys, prosecutors reporters and others were waiting in near silence in the courtroom as the jury entered the courtroom.

A drama-filled trial  

The six-week trial featured dramatic clashes between lawyers and witnesses, the judge and Trump.  

The testimony included tense moments, such as defense lawyer Todd Blanche accusing Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen , of lying on the stand and former Trump spokesperson Hope Hicks breaking into tears . 

Meanwhile, Judge Juan Merchan threatened to jail Trump if he continued to violate a gag order against talking about witnesses participating in the case. Merchan also scolded Blanche for an “outrageous” statement in closing arguments that the jury shouldn’t “send someone to prison” based on Cohen’s testimony. 

A flock of Republican surrogates showed up to support Trump, and one conspiracy theorist set himself on fire outside the courthouse. 

Correction: A previous version of this story quoted Trump as saying "this is far from over."