A persistent trope in free speech doctrine is that overbroad
laws chill protected expression and compromise the
breathing room needed for a vibrant marketplace of ideas.
The conventional restrictions on facial challenges of
measures that sweep beyond legitimate regulatory zones are
relaxed. Whether and to what extent this liberal approach to
judicial review actually governs in free speech law and not
elsewhere, and whether this is constitutionally or
normatively defensible, have been the subject of considerable
and exceptionally insightful scholarship. Yet the United
States Supreme Court has given the best of this work slight
Continue reading here.