Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- First Amendment (3)
- Constitutional Law (2)
- Criminal Law (2)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (1)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (1)
-
- Internet Law (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Law and Philosophy (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Legal Studies (1)
- Legal Theory (1)
- Other Political Science (1)
- Political Science (1)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (1)
- Religion Law (1)
- Sexuality and the Law (1)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- Transnational Law (1)
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Defining Hate Speech, Andrew Sellars
Defining Hate Speech, Andrew Sellars
Faculty Scholarship
There is no shortage of opinions about what should be done about hate speech, but if there is one point of agreement, it is that the topic is ripe for rigorous study. But just what is hate speech, and how will we know it when we see it online? For all of the extensive literature about the causes, harms, and responses to hate speech, few scholars have endeavored to systematically define the term. Where other areas of content analysis have developed rich methodologies to account for influences like context or bias, the present scholarship around hate speech rarely extends beyond …
The Government Brand, Mary-Rose Papandrea
The Government Brand, Mary-Rose Papandrea
Northwestern University Law Review
In Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that Texas could deny the Sons of Confederate Veterans a specialty license plate because the public found the group’s Confederate flag logo offensive. The Court did not reach this conclusion because it deemed the Confederate flag to fall within a category of unprotected speech, such as true threats, incitement, or fighting words; because it revisited its determination in R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul that restrictions on hate speech are unconstitutional; because travelers who see the license plates are a “captive audience”; or because …
The Unpunishable Immorality, Ramzi Nasser
An Opportunity Missed? A Constitutional Analysis Of Proposed Reforms To Tasmania's 'Hate Speech' Laws, Joshua Forrester, Augusto Zimmerman, Lorraine Finlay
An Opportunity Missed? A Constitutional Analysis Of Proposed Reforms To Tasmania's 'Hate Speech' Laws, Joshua Forrester, Augusto Zimmerman, Lorraine Finlay
Law Papers and Journal Articles
The Tasmanian government has proposed reforms to the ‘hate speech’ provisions in the Anti-Discrimination Act 1998 (Tas). However, these reforms are unsatisfactory. They do not address, and in fact compound, the constitutional invalidity of Tasmania’s ‘hate speech’ laws. In this article, we demonstrate that Tasmania’s present ‘hate speech’ laws, like equivalent provisions in other States and Territories, impermissibly infringe the implied freedom of political communication. We also demonstrate that certain proposed reforms further infringe the implied freedom of political communication. We will conclude by proposing elements of a constitutionally valid law against incitement to enmity.
Modernizing Pakistan's Blasphemy Law As Hate Speech, Farhan Raouf
Modernizing Pakistan's Blasphemy Law As Hate Speech, Farhan Raouf
LLM Theses
It is difficult to define blasphemy. What is regarded as blasphemous will depend on the values prevalent in a given society. In general, it includes denigrating and insulting expressions targeted toward God and other aspects of religion. My thesis is that blasphemy, to the extent it should be dealt with by the law, should be regarded a sub-category of hate speech. The law should concern itself only with those aspects of blasphemy which incite hatred against a group which is identifiable on the basis of religion. More specifically, I argue that Pakistan should repeal its blasphemy law (s. 295-c Penal …
Hate Speech And Double Standards, Thomas M. Keck
Hate Speech And Double Standards, Thomas M. Keck
Political Science - All Scholarship
Many European states ban the public expression of hateful speech directed at racial and religious minorities, and an increasing number do so for anti-gay speech as well. These laws have been subjected to a wide range of legal, philosophical, and empirical investigation, but this paper explores one potential cost that has not received much attention in the literature. Statutory bans on hate speech leave democratic societies with a Hobson’s choice. If those societies ban incitements of hatred against some vulnerable groups, they will inevitably face parallel demands for protection of other such groups. If they accede to those demands, they …