Law Commons^™

Why Confronting The Internet’S Dark Side?, Raphael Cohen-Almagor

raphael cohen-almagor

Raphael Cohen-Almagor, the author of Confronting the Internet's Dark Side, explains his motivation for exploring the dangerous side of the world wide web. This new book is the first comprehensive book on social responsibility on the Internet.

Freedom Of Speech In American & Spanish Law: A Comparative Perspective, Alfredo Coll

ALFREDO COLL

The Supreme Court of the United States, particularly in the area of obscenity within freedom of speech, has imposed stringent procedural requirements on governmental action aimed at controlling the exercise of first amendment rights. This study argues that several lessons can be learned from these cases: that a judicial body, following an adversary hearing, must decide on the protected character of the speech, and that the judicial determination must either precede or immediately follow any governmental action which restricts speech. The authors also compare and contrast free speech protection in the United States as compared to Spain by analyzing several …

One Spark Can Set A Fire: The Role Of Intent In Incitement To Genocide, Kate Kovarovic

Kate Kovarovic

The world was introduced to an entirely new method of warfare during World War II: that which was fought with words. Hitler mastered the art of media manipulation, and the world struggled to overcome his capacity to influence the German people. After the war, the international community felt compelled to restrict the type of conduct that had enabled Hitler to so easily gain control of his audiences. However, legal scholars struggled to balance this need with the protection of free speech. Eventually, the Genocide Convention was drafted to explicitly prohibit direct and public incitement to genocide, but not mere hate …

Hate Speech And Government Speech, Charlotte H. Taylor

Charlotte H. Taylor

Hate Speech and Government Speech

After a spate of hate speech incidents involving nooses provoked outcry in 2007, the immediate response was regulation. A number of states passed laws proscribing the placing of a noose on private property with the intent to intimidate. This response reanimates the familiar debate between those who seek to ban hate speech—the “anti-subordination camp”—and those who oppose such prohibitions on speech—the “free speech camp.” At loggerheads since the movement to institute anti-hate speech laws first gathered momentum in the late 1980s, these two camps fundamentally disagree over how to reconcile the constitutional value of equality …

Wild-West Cowboys Versus Cheese-Eating Surrender Monkeys: Some Problems In Comparative Approaches To Extreme Speech, Eric Heinze

Prof. Eric Heinze, Queen Mary University of London

All European states ban some form of hate speech. US law precludes such bans. In view of the political and symbolic importance of free speech, it becomes tempting to assume that trans-Atlantic differences towards hate speech reflect deeper cultural divisions.

However, we must pay attention to comparative methodology before drawing ambitious conclusions about cross-cultural social and political differences that derive solely from differences in formal, black-letter norms. In this volume, Robert Post claims that formal, constitutional requirements of content-neutral regulation reflect a freer public sphere in the US, in contrast to the European public sphere.

Yet a legal-realist approach casts …

Cumulative Jurisprudence And Hate Speech: Sexual Orientation And Analogies To Disability, Age And Obesity, Eric Heinze

Prof. Eric Heinze, Queen Mary University of London

Non-discrimination norms in human rights instruments generally enumerate specified categories for protection, such as race, ethnicity, sex or religion, etc. They often omit express reference to sexual minorities.

Through open-ended interpretation, however, sexual minorities subsequently become incorporated. That ‘cumulative jurisprudence’ yields protections for sexual minorities through norms governing privacy, employment, age of consent, or freedoms of speech and association.

Hate speech bans, too, are often formulated with reference to traditionally recognised categories, particularly race and religion. It might be expected that the same cumulative jurisprudence should therefore be applied to include sexual minorities. In this article, that approach is challenged. …

Cross Burning A Hate Speech Under The First Amendment To The United States Constitution, Wilson Huhn

Wilson R. Huhn

Under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, ‘hate speech’ is constitutionally protected unless the circumstances of the case indicate that the speaker intended to threaten violence or provoke an immediate act of violence. While a person may be removed from a classroom or fired from employment for engaging in ‘hate speech’, under the First Amendment a person may be charged with a crime only if their statements constitute a threat or provocation of immediate violence. Moreover, even in cases where it is clear that a person is threatening violence or that violence is imminent, the person …