Friday, June 21, 2019
First Amendment Protects Offensive Speech. Even by This Anti-Israel Movement
Sen. Marco Rubio last week criticized the anti-Israel movement known as Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions, calling it “anti-Semitism disguised as economic policy and disguised as a free speech argument.”
The Florida Republican also called on Congress to pass a bill allowing the states to “go after” the movement, which considers Israel an “apartheid state” and argues in favor of various economic sanctions against Israel.
Rubio sets up a false dichotomy by saying the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement is masquerading as free speech. The movement may be anti-Semitic, economically wrongheaded, and offensive, but it’s still protected by the First Amendment.
The Constitution protects a person’s right to say offensive things. In Snyder v. Phelps, the Supreme Court held that speech on a matter of public concern is protected speech, even if that speech is offensive or outrageous.
The Supreme Court has exempted some forms of speech (for instance, obscenity, libel, and speech inciting violence) from First Amendment protection, but unless the movement crosses one of those lines, it should be protected.
SOURCE
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
The first amendment give people the right to say offensive things. It doesn't give them the right to be free from criticism for what they say.
Anon 1:37,
We would hope that there is a difference between "going after" someone as suggested by Rubio, and criticism as suggested by you.
The government welds tremendous power and has been known to abuse it. For example, a popular singer who supports BDS had a concert cancelled by the government after she was booked because Florida has a law that says if you support BDS, you cannot be hired by the government. Thus, the woman, who was hired for a concert at a county fair, was told she could not appear.
The State also just passed a free speech debacle which says that criticism of Israel and Jews based on stereotypes is illegal and the person is subject to arrest. It classifies certain types of speech critical of Israel and members of the Jewish faith as an example of a "hate crime."
The sad thing is that the person who sponsored the bill attacked a man of Jewish faith for sponsoring a forum called "Palestine/Israel, Opening the Dialogue." The Representative called the Jewish man a "Judenrat" which is the term applied to alleged Nazi collaborators in WWII.
Courts have struck down BDS legislation in some states and it should be struck down everywhere. The government "going after" people for speech with which some people disagree is dangerous and wrong.
Post a Comment