Content Based Speech.

 If by "speech content-based" you are referring to content-based restrictions on speech, then it relates to the distinction made in First Amendment jurisprudence regarding different types of speech and the level of protection afforded to them.

Content-based restrictions refer to regulations or laws that restrict speech based on the specific content or viewpoint expressed. These restrictions are subject to a higher level of scrutiny by courts when assessing their constitutionality.

Under the First Amendment, content-based restrictions must pass strict scrutiny, which means the government must demonstrate a compelling interest in regulating the specific content or viewpoint and show that the restriction is narrowly tailored and the least restrictive means to achieve that interest. Content-based restrictions are often more likely to be found unconstitutional because they can infringe upon free speech rights and potentially stifle expression.

On the other hand, content-neutral restrictions refer to regulations that are not based on the content or viewpoint of the speech but focus on other factors such as time, place, and manner. Content-neutral restrictions are generally subject to intermediate scrutiny, meaning the government must show that the regulation serves a significant governmental interest, is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest, and leaves open alternative channels for communication.

Examples of content-based restrictions that face heightened scrutiny include laws targeting specific political or religious viewpoints, while examples of content-neutral restrictions include regulations on noise levels, restrictions on the size or location of signs, or permit requirements for demonstrations.

It's important to note that the application and interpretation of content-based and content-neutral restrictions can vary, and courts analyze each case based on its specific facts and circumstances