---
title: Ga. Const. Art. I, Sec. I, Para. V. Freedom of speech and of the press guaranteed.
collection: code
id: ga-const:art-i-sec-i-para-v
cite_as: Ga. Const. Art. I, Sec. I, Para. V
canonical_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-i-sec-i-para-v
md_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-i-sec-i-para-v.md
text_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-i-sec-i-para-v/text
source_url: https://www.legis.ga.gov/api/document/docs/default-source/joint-features-document-library/2ga-const-(v2)-2016-pdf.pdf?sfvrsn=f5de823e_0#page=126
date: 2016
status: active
corpus_version: 2025-supplement-89aa39ab3c68
license: CC0-1.0
publisher: Georgia Commons, an independent project of Georgia Civic Data. Not the State of Georgia. Not legal advice.
up: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/index.md
previous: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-i-sec-i-para-iv.md
next: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-i-sec-i-para-vi.md
index: https://georgiacommons.org/code/index.md
omitted: notes
omitted_chars: 51292
omitted_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-i-sec-i-para-v.md?notes=all&start=11598
version: the only printed version
in_force: true
current_through: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly
heading_path: CONSTITUTION OF THE / BILL OF RIGHTS / RIGHTS OF PERSONS
---

# Ga. Const. Art. I, Sec. I, Para. V. Freedom of speech and of the press guaranteed.

A constitution provision shown as in force is in force as printed in the volume. A court decision can make a printed provision unenforceable without changing the volume, and the volume does not record that.

No law shall be passed to curtail or restrain the freedom of speech or of the press. Every person may speak, write, and publish sentiments on all subjects but shall be responsible for the abuse of that liberty.

## Cross References

Liberty of speech or of the press generally, U.S. Const., amend. 1. Invasion of privacy through electronic mediums, T. 16, C. 11, Pt. 3. Limits to free speech: abusive or obscene language, §§ 16-5-25, 16-11-39, 16-11-39.1, and 38-2-549. Publication of name or identity of female raped or assaulted with intent to commit rape, § 16-6-23. False alarms, § 16-10-27 et seq. Inciting insurrection, § 16-11-3 et seq. Exercise of rights of freedom of speech and right to petition government for redress of grievances; legislative findings; verification of claims; definitions; procedure on motions; exception; attorney’s fees and expenses, § 9-11-11.1. Illegal advertising, § 16-11-26 et seq. Terroristic threats or acts, § 16-11-37. Defamation, § 16-11-40. Disclosure of information obtained in business of preparing federal or state income tax returns or assisting in preparation, § 16-11-81. Obscene publications, §§ 16-12-80 et seq. and 36-60-3. Open and public meetings, § 50-14-1 et seq. Newspaper libel, § 51-5-2. Slander, § 51-5-4.

## Law Reviews

For article, ‘‘Freedoms of the First Amendment in Georgia,’’ see 15 Ga. B.J. 405 (1953). For article discussing the weaknesses in Georgia statutes prohibiting lobbying, and the effect of such law on lawyers, see 5 Mercer L. Rev. 311 (1954). For article, ‘‘Personal Rights, Property Rights and Due Process: A Comparison of Constitutional Protection in the Georgia Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court,’’ see 9 Mercer L. Rev. 253 (1958). For survey article on constitutional law, see 34 Mercer L. Rev. 53 (1982). For annual survey of constitutional law, see 35 Mercer L. Rev. 73 (1983). For article, ‘‘Contempt of Court in Georgia,’’ see 23 Ga. St. B.J. 66 (1987). For article, ‘‘‘I’m Not Gay, M’Kay?’: Should Falsely Calling Someone a Homosexual be Defamatory?,’’ see 44 Ga. L. Rev. 739 (2010). For article, ‘‘Bullying in Public Schools: The Intersection Between the Student’s Free Speech Rights and the School’s Duty to Protect,’’ see 62 Mercer L. Rev. 407 (2011). For annual survey on local government law, see 64 Mercer L. Rev. 213 (2012).

For note on defamation in radio and television, see 15 Mercer L. Rev. 450 (1964). For note on broadcast negligence and the first amendment, see 33 Mercer L. Rev. 423 (1981). For note, ‘‘A Bridge Too Far? Directive 1344.10 and the Military’s Inroads on Core Political Speech in Campaign Media,’’ see 44 Ga. L. Rev. 837 (2010).

For comment on Atlanta Newspapers, Inc. v. State, 101 Ga. App. 105, 113 S.E.2d 148 (1960), appearing below, see 12 Mercer L. Rev. 284 (1960). For comment on Atlanta Newspapers, Inc. v. Grimes, 216 Ga. 74, 114 S.E.2d 421 (1960), see 23 Ga. B.J. 406 (1961). For comment on City of Atlanta v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 219 Ga. 271, 133 S.E.2d 12 (1963), and movie censorship with regard to freedom of speech and press, see 15 Mercer L. Rev. 514 (1964). For comment on Atlanta v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 219 Ga. 271, 133 S.E.2d 12 (1963), see 26 Ga. B.J. 475 (1964). For comment, ‘‘The Re-porter’s Privilege in Georgia: ‘Qualified’ to do the Job?,’’ see 9 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 495 (1993). For comment, ‘‘You’ve Got Libel: How the Can-Spam Act Delivers Defamation Liability to Spam-Fighters and Why the First Amendment Should Delete the Problem,’’ see 58 Emory L.J. 1013 (2009). For comment, ‘‘Room for Error Online: Revising Georgia’s Retraction Statute to Accommodate the Rise of Internet Media,’’ see 28 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 923 (2012).

## 1976 Constitution.

Art. I, Sec. I, Para. IV.

## Lish.

It is a fundamental principle, long established that the freedom of speech and of the press which is secured by the Constitution, does not confer an absolute right to speak or publish, without responsibility, whatever one may choose, or an unrestricted and unbridled license that gives immunity for every possible use of language and prevents the punishment of those who abuse this freedom. Carr v. State, 176 Ga. 55, 166 S.E. 827 (1932).

## Exercise of Freedom Must Be Compatible with Preservation of Other Essential, Guaranteed Freedoms.

Freedom of speech and of the press, as guaranteed by the Constitution, is essential to the preservation of a free society; but its exercise must be compatible with the preservation of other freedoms essential to a democracy and guaranteed by the Constitution. The independence of the judiciary and the fair and impartial administration of justice are also necessary to a free society. Atlanta Newspapers, Inc. v. State, 216 Ga. 399, 116 S.E.2d 580 (1960).

Free speech does not necessarily exempt one from regulation, license, or payment of tax, which, under some other theory of law, is a protected public or private right. That which may be a permissible regulation even though it restricts the right of free speech to some extent must bear some genuine and reasonable relation to the general welfare, and to the public health, safety, or morals. Wolfe v. City of Albany, 104 Ga. App. 264, 121 S.E.2d 331 (1961).

Free speech does not give one right to malign another or do act injurious to another’s person or property. Wolfe v. City of Albany, 104 Ga. App. 264, 121 S.E.2d 331 (1961).

Restraints on freedom of speech

## Must Be Reasonably Related to Community Welfare.

When there is no reasonable relationship between the restraints imposed on freedom of speech and the general welfare of the community, the ordinance is unconstitutional. Wolfe v. City of Albany, 104 Ga. App. 264, 121 S.E.2d 331 (1961).

All speech and press that lie outside of an ‘‘abuse of that liberty’’ are protected by this paragraph. The protection is absolute and cannot be abridged, curtailed, or restrained in any degree for any period of time no matter how short. K. Gordon Murray Prods., Inc. v. Floyd, 217 Ga. 784, 125 S.E.2d 207 (1962). General Consideration (Cont’d)

## Abuses of Liberty May Be Suppressed, Restrained, Enjoined, or Punished.

‘‘Abuses of that liberty’’ are outside the protection of the Constitution and may be suppressed, restrained, enjoined, or punished without violating the Constitution, provided constitutional means for so doing are employed. K. Gordon Murray Prods., Inc. v. Floyd, 217 Ga. 784, 125 S.E.2d 207 (1962). tions but no freedom from censure

## No Prior Restraints Upon Publicawhen Criminal Matter Published.

The liberty of the press is indeed essential to the nature of a free state; but this consists in laying no previous restraints upon publications, and not in freedom from censure for criminal matter when published. Every free person has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments the person pleases before the public; to forbid this, is to destroy the freedom of the press; but if the person publishes what is improper, mischievous, or illegal, the person must take the consequence of the person’s own temerity. 106 Forsyth Corp. v. Bishop, 362 F. Supp. 1389 (M.D. Ga. 1972), aff’d, 482 F.2d 280 (5th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 422 U.S. 1044, 95 S. Ct. 2660, 45 L. Ed. 2d 696 (1975).

Liberty of the press was intended to prevent all previous restraints upon publications as had been practiced by other governments, and in early times, to stifle the efforts of patriots to enlighten their fellow subjects upon their rights and the duties of rulers. The liberty of the press was to be unrestrained, but one who used it was to be responsible in case of its abuse. 106 Forsyth Corp. v. Bishop, 362 F. Supp. 1389 (M.D. Ga. 1972), aff’d, 482 F.2d 280 (5th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 422 U.S. 1044, 95 S. Ct. 2660, 45 L. Ed. 2d 696 (1975).

## When Injunction Not Invalid as Illegal Prior Restraint.

If prior to the issuance of an injunction an adequate determination is made that certain communication is unprotected by constitutional provisions safeguarding freedom of speech; that the order is based on a continuing course of repetitive conduct; and that the order is clear and sweeps no more broadly than necessary, then the injunction is not invalid as an illegal prior restraint. Retail Credit Co. v. Russell, 234 Ga. 765, 218 S.E.2d 54 (1975).

Regulatory statute not intended to control content of speech upheld when justified by valid governmental

## Interest.

The freedom of expression guaranteed under the Constitution has been consistently recognized as being narrower than an unlimited license to talk; and regulatory statutes not intended to control the content of speech but incidentally limiting its unfettered exercise are not regarded as violating the constitutional guarantee when justified by a valid governmental interest. Hodnett v. City of Atlanta, 145 Ga. App. 285, 243 S.E.2d 605 (1978).

## State Conduct Is Required.

Former employee’s claim that the employee was dismissed because of expressive activity, failed under both Georgia’s equal protection provisions and freedom of speech guarantees because the former employer and the two managers, were not state actors or private parties acting under the color of state law. Johnson v. Shoney’s, Inc., No. 7:04-CV-68 (HL), 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18101 (M.D. Ga. Aug. 18, 2005).

Cited in 10950 Retail, LLC v. City of Johns Creek, 299 Ga. App. 458, 682 S.E.2d 637 (2009); DeLong v. State, 310 Ga. App. 518, 714 S.E.2d 98 (2011).

Freedom of the Press

Newspaper libel as limitation on

## Publication Privilege.

Certain newspaper publications are privileged; but the privilege is conditional, not absolute; and the ‘‘liberty of the press’’ will not authorize a violation of O.C.G.A. § 51-5-2. Horton v. Georgian Co., 175 Ga. 261, 165 S.E. 443 (1932).

Libel is abuse of liberty of press for which laws of state hold press answerable in damages. McGill v. State, 209 Ga. 500, 74 S.E.2d 78 (1953).

Liberty of press is subordinate to independence of judiciary and

## Proper Administration of Justice.

McGill v. State, 209 Ga. 500, 74 S.E.2d 78 (1953); Atlanta Newspapers, Inc. v. Grimes, 216 Ga. 74, 114 S.E.2d 421 (1960); Atlanta Newspapers, Inc. v. State, 216 Ga. 399, 116 S.E.2d 580 (1960). tice by state courts is abuse of liberty

## Obstructing Administration of Jusof Speech and of Press.

Constitution of Georgia guarantees the liberty of speech and of the press, but does not protect an abuse of that liberty. Obstructing the administration of justice by the courts of this state is an abuse of that liberty and will subject the abuser to punishment for contempt of court. McGill v. State, 209 Ga. 500, 74 S.E.2d 78 (1953); Atlanta Newspapers, Inc. v. State, 216 Ga. 399, 116 S.E.2d 580 (1960).

Liberty of the press is not synonymous with license, and it does not give the press any right or license to publish libelous matter without responsibility to those who are innocent victims of such libelous publication. Freedom of the press gives the right to print the truth and to comment fairly about the truth; freedom of the press does not give a license to print untruths or half-truths, which are equivalent to untruths and which, in their effect on a person’s character and reputation are often more damaging and devastating than would be an outright falsehood. Davis v. Macon Tel. Publishing Co., 93 Ga. App. 633, 92 S.E.2d 619 (1956).

## Courts May Stop Press When Interfering with Conducting Court Proceedings.

Courts may stop conduct of representatives of the press in any field of activity interfering with orderly conduct of court procedure or creating distractions interfering therewith. Atlanta Newspapers, Inc. v. Grimes, 216 Ga. 74, 114 S.E.2d 421 (1960), commented on in 23 Ga. B.J. 406 (1961).

When restraint upon newspaper’s liberty of speech and of press unwar-


> The printed notes continue for 51,292 more characters, not shown here. Continue at https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-i-sec-i-para-v.md?notes=all&start=11598