Law Commons^™

La Libertad De Expresión Frente A Los Delitos De Negacionismo Y De Provocación Al Odio Y A La Violencia: Sombras Sin Luces En La Reforma Del Código Penal, Germán M. Teruel Lozano

Germán M. Teruel Lozano

Racist and negationist speeches are at the border of tolerable messages in a democratic society. This paper will explore the limits to freedom of speech in the Spanish law, which is configured as a constitutional order «open» and based on the idea of «person», contrasting with the militant model characteristic of the European Convention on Human Rights. Then, once outlined the content of this freedom, the paper will submit to constitutional review the Holocaust denial crime and hate speech crimes after the reform of the Criminal Code in 2015, from a constitutional-criminal law perspective.

Rethinking The Context Of Hate Speech Regulation, Robert Kahn

Robert Kahn

In this essay I review Michael Herz and Peter Molnar (eds.) The Content and Context of Hate Speech: Rethinking Regulation and Responses (Cambridge University Press 2012). As I show in the review, the Herz and Molnar volume advances our understanding of comparative hate speech regulation in three ways. First, the essays suggest that local context has a role to play in understanding, assessing, and applying hate speech regulations, even in an age when online hate speech is pressuring states and regions to reach common solutions to these problems. Second, the essays rebut the commonly held premise that the United States …

Racist Speech, Outsider Jurisprudence, And The Meaning Of America, Steven H. Shiffrin

Steven H. Shiffrin

No abstract provided.

Restricting Hate Speech Against Private Figures: Lessons In Power-Based Censorship From Defamation Law, Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero

This article examines the debate between those who favor greater protection for minorities vulnerable to hate speech and First Amendment absolutists who are skeptical of any burdens on pure speech. The author also provides another perspective on the debate by highlighting the "public/private figure" distinction as an area within First Amendment law that acknowledges differences in power, a construct anti-hate speech advocates should use to further their cause. Specifically, the author places the "public/private figure" division in a theoretical and historical context and then provides empirical support for the thesis that whites enjoy a more prominent societal role and greater …

Globally Speaking - Honoring The Victims' Stories: Matsuda's Human Rights Praxis, Berta E. Hernández-Truyol

Berta E. Hernández-Truyol

Globally speaking, international law and the vast majority of domestic legal systems strive to protect the right to freedom of expression. The United States’ First Amendment provides an early historical protection of speech—a safeguard now embraced around the world. The extent of this protection, however, varies among states. The United States stands alone in excluding countervailing considerations of equality, dignitary, or privacy interests that would favor restrictions on speech. The gravamen of the argument supporting such American exceptionalism is that free expression is necessary in a democracy. Totalitarianism, the libertarian narrative goes, thrives on government control of information to the …

La Lucha Del Derecho Contra El Negacionismo: Una Peligrosa Frontera. Particular Estudio De Los Ordenamientos Italiano Y Español, Germán M. Teruel Lozano

Germán M. Teruel Lozano

The struggle of the Law against negationism: a dangerous border. Particular study of the Spanish and Italian legal system (PhD. Thesis) - The document content an abstract of the thesis in English, Spanish and Italian.

Surveillance, Speech Suppression And Degradation Of The Rule Of Law In The “Post-Democracy Electronic State”, David Barnhizer

David Barnhizer

None of us can claim the quality of original insight achieved by Alexis de Tocqueville in his early 19th Century classic Democracy in America in his observation that the “soft” repression of democracy was unlike that in any other political form. It is impossible to deny that we in the US, the United Kingdom and Western Europe are experiencing just such a “gentle” drift of the kind that Tocqueville describes, losing our democratic integrity amid an increasingly “pretend” democracy. He explained: “[T]he supreme power [of government] then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society …

Why Do Europeans Ban Hate Speech? A Debate Between Karl Loewenstein And Robert Post, Robert Kahn

Robert Kahn

European countries restrict hate speech, the United States does not. This much is clear. What explains this difference? Too often the current discussion falls back on a culturally rich but normatively vacant exceptionalism (American or otherwise) or a normatively driven convergence perspective that fails to address historical, cultural and experiential differences that distinguish countries and legal systems. Inspired by the development discourse of historical sociology, this article seeks to record instances where Americans or Europeans have argued their approach to hate speech laws was more “advanced” or “modern.”

To that end this article focuses on two authors whose writing appears …

"Linguistic Cleansing": Strategies For Redesigning Human Perception And Behavior, David Barnhizer

David Barnhizer

James Madison recognized the need to balance competing interests in his analysis of factious groups. In Federalist No. 10, Madison sets out the idea of faction in the following words. “By a faction I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.” Madison goes on to describe two “cures” for faction. One is to “destroy the liberty” that allows it to bloom, …

Hate Speech On Campus And The First Amendment: Can They Be Reconciled?, Thomas Schweitzer

Thomas A. Schweitzer

No abstract provided.

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 …