3 ms·

>>Suppressing Nazi speech is the same as suppressing a social justice warrior right? Nope, First Amendment does not protect hate speech.

ancarda 10y ago
Do you have a source? I'd be surprised to hear that's the case. My understanding was the first amendment covered all speech.
- enraged_camel 10y ago
  You are right, "hate speech" was not the right term to use. That said, there absolutely are types of speech that the First Amendment doesn't cover: http://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/initiatives_awards/students_in_action/debate_hate.html http://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/initiativ... >>In this country there is no right to speak fighting words—those words without social value, directed to a specific individual, that would provoke a reasonable member of the group about whom the words are spoken. For example, a person cannot utter a racial or ethnic epithet to another if those words are likely to cause the listener to react violently.
  - icebraining 10y ago
    It does cover all speech; racial and ethnic epithets are still covered, just not in a very specific context. Which never applies in Twitter.
  - bzbarsky 10y ago
    As I understand it, "fighting words" is _very_ context-dependent and narrow in modern jurisprudence. See https://www.popehat.com/2015/05/19/how-to-spot-and-critique-censorship-tropes-in-the-medias-coverage-of-free-speech-controversies/ https://www.popehat.com/2015/05/19/how-to-spot-and-critique-... and search for "Trope seven". In particular, application of "fighting words" pretty much requires that the speaker and listener were in close physical proximity, such that a fight could actually occur. Not really relevant to twitter, for the most part.
nodesocket 10y ago
You are making stuff up. "hate speech" is not a thing in the first amendment. Hate speech is protected. There are countless court rulings on this. Exhibit A: "in 1977 a federal court upheld the right of neo-Nazis to goose-step right through the town of Skokie, Illinois, which had a disproportionately large number of Holocaust survivors as residents." WP article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/07/no-theres-no-hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/?utm_term=.8a50db9b0153 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...
s73ver 10y ago
The First Amendment does protect hate speech. However, Twitter is not bound by the First Amendment.

ancarda 10y ago

Do you have a source? I'd be surprised to hear that's the case. My understanding was the first amendment covered all speech.

enraged_camel 10y ago
You are right, "hate speech" was not the right term to use. That said, there absolutely are types of speech that the First Amendment doesn't cover: http://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/initiatives_awards/students_in_action/debate_hate.html http://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/initiativ... >>In this country there is no right to speak fighting words—those words without social value, directed to a specific individual, that would provoke a reasonable member of the group about whom the words are spoken. For example, a person cannot utter a racial or ethnic epithet to another if those words are likely to cause the listener to react violently.
- icebraining 10y ago
  It does cover all speech; racial and ethnic epithets are still covered, just not in a very specific context. Which never applies in Twitter.
- bzbarsky 10y ago
  As I understand it, "fighting words" is _very_ context-dependent and narrow in modern jurisprudence. See https://www.popehat.com/2015/05/19/how-to-spot-and-critique-censorship-tropes-in-the-medias-coverage-of-free-speech-controversies/ https://www.popehat.com/2015/05/19/how-to-spot-and-critique-... and search for "Trope seven". In particular, application of "fighting words" pretty much requires that the speaker and listener were in close physical proximity, such that a fight could actually occur. Not really relevant to twitter, for the most part.

nodesocket 10y ago

You are making stuff up. "hate speech" is not a thing in the first amendment. Hate speech is protected. There are countless court rulings on this. Exhibit A: "in 1977 a federal court upheld the right of neo-Nazis to goose-step right through the town of Skokie, Illinois, which had a disproportionately large number of Holocaust survivors as residents." WP article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/07/no-theres-no-hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/?utm_term=.8a50db9b0153 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...

s73ver 10y ago

The First Amendment does protect hate speech. However, Twitter is not bound by the First Amendment.