Balázs Fekete Associate Professor Pázmány Péter Catholic University, Hungary

Balázs Fekete has been a lecturer at Pázmány Péter Catholic University Faculty of Law and Political Sciences in Budapest, Hungary since 2003. In 2013 he became an associate professor. He has also been a research fellow of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences Centre for Social Sciences Institute for Legal Studies since 2008. He received an LLM degree focused on European Union Law and International Public Law at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in 2007, and PhD degree in law at the Pázmány Péter Catholic University in 2011. His principal research area is comparative law including methodology and specialised questions. In addition, he is also interested in problems of European Union law and legal philosophy. He is the author of more than 50 articles and book chapters in Hungarian and other languages, and a monograph on the modern history of comparative law thinking A modern jog-összehasonlítás paradigmái [The paradigms of modern comparative law] (Gondolat, 2011). He has been a speaker in more than 20 conferences in various countries.

Argumentation typologies in the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the United States related to the foundations and limitations of the freedom of expression, and their relevance to the sociology of values

This presentation is devoted to the deconstruction of certain seminal decisions of the US Supreme Court in the field of the freedom of expression from the aspect of the sociology of values. It considers these judgments as literary texts primarily not as decisions having a normative value and it tries to map the various arguments used by the members of the court. In doing so, as a first step, it distinguishes among six different types of argumentation that may either provide grounds for the freedom of speech or justify some limitations. Having analysed these the presentation argues that eight fundamental values can be identified – the truth, social and political progress, competition, information, public interest, public peace, adaptation and the protection of individuals – that may shape the understanding of freedom of speech in the jurisprudence of the US Supreme Court.