In the 1950 Supreme Court case Feiner v. New York, Irving Feiner was convicted for inciting a breach of peace due to his speech criticizing American politicians and local law enforcement in Syracuse, New York. The police had asked him to end his speech after a crowd gathered, but he refused and was subsequently arrested. On appeal, the Supreme Court upheld Feiner's conviction by a vote of 6-3. The majority opinion held that while freedom of speech is protected under the First Amendment, it does not grant an absolute right to speak whenever or wherever one pleases without considering public safety and order. In this instance, they found that police acted reasonably in arresting Feiner as they were concerned about potential violence from those who disagreed with his views rather than trying to suppress his message itself.

In the dissenting opinion for FEINER v. NEW YORK, Justice Black argued that Irving Feiner's arrest and conviction violated his First Amendment rights to free speech. He contended that the police had no right to stop Feiner’s speech just because it was causing a disturbance among listeners who disagreed with him. According to Justice Black, this ruling could potentially allow authorities to suppress any public speaker whose views are not popular or provoke hostility from others in society. He believed that such an interpretation of law would undermine democracy by stifling open debate and discussion on important issues, which is essential for informed decision-making by citizens in a democratic society.