Just tackled a great listener question on our latest Q&A segment of Lawyer Talk! The topic? "Fighting words"—and whether using particularly nasty insults can actually justify or excuse an assault in court.

Here are three key takeaways from the episode:

• Assault & Fighting Words: As Steve Palmer explains, simply hearing "fighting words" rarely justifies assault charges being thrown out. The answer is typically no, though there are rare exceptions. Steve Palmer details this at 00:28.
• Supreme Court Precedent: The famous Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire case addressed whether some words are so inflammatory that they lose First Amendment protection. While the Supreme Court upheld criminalizing certain "fighting words," later cases have narrowed this doctrine in favor of free speech. More insights from Steve Palmer at 01:19.
• First Amendment in Schools: Even students don’t “check their constitutional rights at the door.” Tinker v. Des Moines affirmed that students retain free speech rights at school—an important point for both educators and parents (Steve Palmer at 02:19).

FAQ's

What are "fighting words," and how does U.S. law treat them?

"Fighting words" are certain highly offensive words that the Supreme Court has ruled can sometimes be criminalized, though most speech — even insulting speech — is generally protected by the First Amendment. Steve Palmer explains that while early cases allowed some restrictions, more recent rulings have limited the fighting words doctrine and protected most speech.

Can using extremely offensive language legally justify assault charges being dropped?

According to Steve Palmer, assault is generally not legally justified by the use of fighting words alone. While some rare cases might see an assault charge affected by the presence of extreme insults, most of the time the law does not excuse physical actions based on words.

Do students have First Amendment rights in public schools according to Supreme Court rulings?

Steve Palmer cites the Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines, clarifying that students in public schools do retain their First Amendment rights. This means students don’t lose constitutional protections to free speech simply by entering a school building.

Got a question you want answered on the podcast? Call 614-859-2119 and leave us a voicemail. Steve will answer your question on the next podcast!

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high-publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.

Copyright 2026 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

Mentioned in this episode:

Circle 270 Media Podcast Consultants

Circle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of their marketing strategy. The firm emphasizes the importance of storytelling through podcasting to differentiate businesses and engage with their audiences effectively. www.circle270media.com