A cornerstone of democracy is the First Amendment's protection of free speech. The founding fathers saw this as contributing to democratic government. Ironically, contemporary free speech protects groups such as Nazis, White and Black supremacists, pornographers, gangster rappers, TV violence, and gratuitous film profiteers; in short, these are agents of disorder, and have practically nothing of discourse value. This article argues that the harm of assaultive speech must be taken into account to define specific boundaries for what has been characterized as hate speech.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abrams v. United States. 250 U.S. 616 (1919).
2.
Alderman, E.
, & Kennedy, C. (1991). In our defense: The Bill of Rights in action. New York: William Morrow.
3.
Alexander, L.
(1992). The ADL hate crime statute and the First Amendment. Criminal Justice Ethics, 11, 49-51.
4.
Another battle plan. (December 1993). Leaflet distributed by White Aryan Resistance. Reprinted 1996 by Southern Poverty Law Center.
5.
Baker, C. E.
(1989). Human liberty and freedom of speech. New York: Oxford University Press.
6.
The boundaries of free speech: How free is too free? (1992). National Issues Forum. Pamphlet published by McGraw Hill.
7.
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire. 315 U.S. 568 (1942).
8.
Delgado, R.
(Ed.). (1995). Critical race theory: The cutting edge. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
9.
Fiery leader and loyal follower in the nation of Islam
. (March 3, 1994). New York Times, p. B9.
10.
Fish, S.
(1994). There's no such thing as free speech...and it's a good thing too. New York: Oxford University Press.
11.
Fiss, O. M.
(1996). The irony of free speech. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
12.
Friendly, F. W.
(1981). Minnesota rag. New York: Random House.
13.
Greenawalt, K.
(1995). Fighting words: Individuals, communities, and liberties of speech. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
14.
Jones, C. H.
(1991). Equality, dignity, and harm: The constitutionality of regulating American campus ethnoviolence. The Wayne Law Review, 37, 1383-1432.
15.
MacKinnon, C.
(1993). Only words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
16.
Marriott, M.
(March 5, 1994). Manhood training at the mosque: Hope, discipline, defiance. New York Times, p. B8.
17.
Propaganda made me do it
. (February 28, 1994). Newsweek, p. 34.
18.
R.A.V. v. St. Paul. 505 U.S. 377 (1992).
19.
Schenck v. United States. 249 U.S. 47 (1919).
20.
Smolla, R.
(1993). Free speech in an open society. New York: Vintage Books.
21.
State v. Miller. 260 Ga. 669, 398, S.E.2nd 547 (1990).
22.
Sunstein, C.
(1993). Democracy and the problem of free speech. New York: Free Press.
23.
Terminiello v. Chicago. 377 U.S. 1, 37 (1949).
24.
Texas v. Johnston. 491 U.S. 397 (1989).
25.
U.S. v. Eichman. 496 U.S. 310 (1990).
26.
U.S. v. Haggerty. 731 F. Supp., 415 W.D. Wash. (1990).
27.
W.
(1993). Words that wound: Critical race theory, assaultive speech, and the First Amendment. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
28.
Wiggs v. Courshon. 355 F. Supp. 206 (S.D. Fla. 1973).
