Hate speech is free speech, Gov. Dean

[SVPete]

Hate speech is free speech, Gov. Dean
Glenn Harlan Reynolds
1:48 p.m. ET April 24, 2017

I tell my constitutional law students that there are a couple of statements that indicate that a speaker is a constitutional illiterate who can safely be ignored. One is the claim that the Constitution views black people as ⅗ the worth of white people (actually, it was all about power in Congress, with slaveowners wanting black people to count 100% toward apportionment so that slaveowners would get more seats in Congress, and abolitionists wanting them not counted at all so that slaveowners would get fewer seats in Congress; the ⅗ compromise was just that, a compromise).

The other hallmark of constitutional illiteracy is the claim that the First Amendment doesn’t protect “hate speech.” And by making that claim last week, Howard Dean, former governor of Vermont and Democratic presidential candidate, revealed himself to be a constitutional illiterate. Then, predictably, he doubled down on his ignorance.

In First Amendment law, the term “hate speech” is meaningless. All speech is equally protected whether it’s hateful or cheerful. It doesn’t matter if it’s racist, sexist or in poor taste, unless speech falls into a few very narrow categories — like “true threats,” which have to address a specific individual, or “incitement,” which must constitute an immediate and intentional encouragement to imminent lawless action — it’s protected.

The term “hate speech” was invented by people who don’t like that freedom, and who want to give the — completely false — impression that there’s a kind of speech that the First Amendment doesn’t protect because it’s hateful. What they mean by “hateful,” it seems, is really just that it’s speech they don’t agree with.

Glenn Reynolds is a Law prof at U Tennessee. In 8, mostly not brief, sentences he explains what the USC protects and refutes two current Lib/Prog conceits. I'm almost surprised that Law professors are "allowed" to speak so plainly and briefly, but Hugh Hewitt has a similar skill.

[Adam Wood]

Reynolds is one of the few sane people still inhabiting Knoxville academia, sadly.  Largely, UTK has gone full moonbat.

Dean is still insisting that he's right, that Leftists like him have some gaia-given right to prevent Ann Coulter from speaking by any means possible because what she says is "hate speech."  Despite getting spanked by even the likes of Kurt Eichenwald, Dumbass Dean persists in his claim that opinions that he doesn't like equates to either a personal threat or inciting a riot.

[Eupher]

Reynolds is one of the few sane people still inhabiting Knoxville academia, sadly.  Largely, UTK has gone full moonbat.

Dean is still insisting that he's right, that Leftists like him have some gaia-given right to prevent Ann Coulter from speaking by any means possible because what she says is "hate speech."  Despite getting spanked by even the likes of Kurt Eichenwald, Dumbass Dean persists in his claim that opinions that he doesn't like equates to either a personal threat or inciting a riot.

Most of academia itself has gone full moonbat - but they're careful (for the most part) to hide it by insisting that they don't attempt to influence thought. They actually believe their indoctrination attempts are invisible. 

[ADsOutburst]

Most of academia itself has gone full moonbat - but they're careful (for the most part) to hide it by insisting that they don't attempt to influence thought. They actually believe their indoctrination attempts are invisible. 

The left doesn't respect anyone else's intelligence; they'll lie to your face even when they know that you know that they're lying.

[SVPete]

So, on one hand the Deaniac approves of Ann Coulter being silenced, while on the other The BERN and Fauxcahontas say she should be allowed to speak peacefully. Might this diminish DU-folks' ardor for Fauxcahontas and increase their F-bombing The BERN?

  Discuss.