Descending On A Montana Town, Neo-Nazi Trolls Test Where Free Speech Ends

[guillaumeb]

From the article:

In the pristine resort town of Whitefish, Mont., members of the small Jewish community believe that neo-Nazi online trolls have crossed a line. They went right past free speech rights, residents say, and made credible threats of violence.
It all began over a year ago with a reported argument between a local Realtor and the mother of one of Whitefish's most controversial part-time residents, the white nationalist Richard Spencer.....

Things got ugly quick. The resulting "troll storm" shed new light on an increasingly common – and unsettling – tactic of far-right extremists that have gained more prominence since the 2016 election......

"These are not informational opinion or any other kind of protected First Amendment communications, these are assaults," says John Morrison, Gersh's attorney, a Democrat and the former Montana state auditor.

To read more:

https://www.npr.org/2018/01/23/579884628/victims-of-neo-nazi-troll-storm-find-difficulties-doing-something-about-it

[Phoenix61]

1. I'm all for free speech and people can

post whatever they want on their FB page, web-page etc. However, when you start posting stuff on someone else's FB page that's a different story. When you personally attack someone, especially when they are not a public figure, that's something else. The first amendment was to protect political speech, not all speech and it is not absolute. Hence, yelling fire in a crowded theate is not protected speech. I realize it's a slippery slope but a threat is a threat whether it's "imminent" or not.

[guillaumeb]

2. And we can assome that the Court will rule on this matter.

Where exactly is the line between free speech and intimidation?