Flashcards Studio

An unnamed province enacts Ordinance No. 202X-12, the Public Expression and Public Peace Act, which makes it unlawful to utter, write, post, or display anything that (a) demeans, discredits, or undermines the credibility of any governor or public institution, or (b) disturbs public order or interferes with essential public services. The ordinance covers statements made in public spaces, on posters, and on online platforms, using broad terms such as “demeans,” “discredits,” and “disturbs public order” without precise limits. A licensed nurse-activist, Ana Morales, posts on her public Facebook page: “Governor Y is corrupt and mismanages health funds.” Morales is charged under the ordinance. Morales challenges the ordinance on its face as unconstitutional. (a) Identify the controlling doctrinal framework Morales relies on. (b) Distinguish facial challenges from as-applied challenges and explain whether the ordinance would fail the facial test. (c) Apply the doctrine to the facts to determine whether the ordinance is void for overbreadth, and whether severability could save any portion. Conclude with the likely outcome under Philippine law.