Hate Speech, Incitement, Fighting Words Flashcards
What is the First Amendment’s stance on hate speech?
The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech; however, it emphasizes that there are no protections against the emotional pain that speech may cause to the receiver. The government should take a hands-off approach and not ban speech based on its content.
What are the critical questions regarding hate speech?
Does hate speech equate to violent criminal conduct? Does it equate to actual assault? The distinction is important for legal considerations.
What was the significance of Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)?
The Supreme Court ruled that Ohio’s laws violated Clarence Brandenburg’s right to free speech. The ruling emphasized that speech is only unprotected if it leads to “imminent lawless action.” The case established the imminent action law test for evaluating incitement.
What was the context of Clarence Brandenburg’s speech in Brandenburg v. Ohio?
Clarence Brandenburg, a KKK leader, claimed the government suppressed the Caucasian race. His case challenged the legality of Ohio’s syndicalism law, which prohibited speech inciting violence against the government.
What is the challenge faced by proponents of hate-speech laws?
They struggle to define a consistent line between hate speech and vigorous criticism, raising concerns about who should have the authority to draw that line.
What defines “fighting words”?
Fighting words are those that provoke an immediate violent reaction from the hearer and are narrowly defined. Factors include aggressive conduct, volume of speech, use of profanities, and the hearer’s reaction.
What was the ruling in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)?
The Supreme Court ruled that there is zero protection for insults that provoke violence. It upheld a New Hampshire law that forbade offensive words in public, establishing the fighting words doctrine.
How did Cohen v. California (1971) challenge the fighting words doctrine?
The Court ruled that Cohen’s jacket, which displayed a vulgar message, did not constitute fighting words, asserting that “one man’s vulgarity is another’s lyric.” This decision emphasized the subjective nature of offensive speech.
What does incitement refer to in speech?
Incitement encourages or urges someone to commit a crime, and it is broader than fighting words. It can occur even if the speaker does not literally call for a crime or believe that the crime will happen.
What are true threats?
True threats are serious expressions of intent to commit unlawful violence against a specific individual or group, and they receive zero protection under the First Amendment.
What is the Counter-Speech Doctrine?
The doctrine posits that the remedy for falsehoods is more speech, not enforced silence. Justice Brandeis stated in Whitney v. California (1927) that through discussion and education, evils can be averted.
It’s fighting words if
- Aggressive conduct with speech
- Speech volume
- Repeated profanities
- How hearer reacts
- Racial slurs
What is the Brandenburg Test?
The test determined that the government may prohibit speech advocating the use of force or crime if the speech satisfies both elements of the two-part test:
The speech is “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action,” AND
The speech is “likely to incite or produce such action.”
