France arrests 54 in hate speech crackdown

[branford]

32. First, enough with the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" argument.

The holding was actually overturned in a subsequent Supreme Court Case, and it's an oversimplification of constitutional law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater

Criminalizing speech that may incite violence, by itself, also would be unconstitutional in this country. In Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 US 444 (1969), the Supreme Court determined determine when inflammatory speech intending to advocate illegal action can be restricted. The standard developed determined that speech advocating the use of force or crime could only be proscribed where two conditions were satisfied: (1) the advocacy is “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action,” and (2) the advocacy is also “likely to incite or produce such action.”

More importantly, the level of potential offensiveness of speech is totally irrelevant under US law. Your delineation of what speech should be permissible, no less point of freedom of speech, is not recognized in American jurisprudence. Free speech is necessary for the exchange of ideas in a free society. The government should never be in the position of determining which are ideas are acceptable and which are not. Never forget that liberal-minded people might not always be in control of government.

In fact, much of the free speech jurisprudence in the USA originated with liberal groups like the ACLU, and involved cases to protect far left groups like communists and socialists from institutional discrimination. The same rights the protect groups like the KKK and Westboro Baptist Church also protect the speech of many here on DU. Moreover, to say that "hateful speech" does not help political discourse is absurd. It just that you may not like some of the discourse it engenders. In any event, it would be legally and politically impossible in the USA to create any legal bright lines concerning acceptable speech, and we culturally err on the side of more speech and ideas, not less. Speech is countered with more speech, not government restrictions.

I would also note that Europe, with all their "hate speech" laws, still manage to routinely elect violent far right and left groups to national and EU positions. Many of these officials make the worst Republicans look downright cuddly. These speech restriction have had little effect on opinions other than to relegate some speech underground. The USA, with our permissiveness concerning offensive and hateful speech, on the other hand, has not elected anyone like these individuals, as it would be considered publicly unacceptable, and our hatred and bigotry is in the open where it can be monitored, criticized and avoided.