Home In the News Should the U.S. Adopt European “Hate Speech” Laws?

Should the U.S. Adopt European “Hate Speech” Laws?

The United States stands virtually alone among Western democracies in not prohibiting offensive speech.  France, Germany, England: they all have criminal laws for speech deemed insulting to an identifiable group. Oh Canada! You too?

Thus far, the United States Supreme Court has routinely rejected the invariably vague laws criminalizing hate speech or offensive language because to do so cannot be squared with the free speech protections of the First Amendment. And rightly so.

But now there seems to be a movement to adopt European-style hate speech laws, and to require social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter to police political speech.

Former Vermont Governor Howard Dean dismissed the notion that hate speech is protected under the First Amendment. And U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., recently chastised Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg for refusing to censor false or misleading political ads.

Never mind that political ads are notoriously misleading, but misleading to whom? You think Zuckerberg and his crew have nothing better to do than “fact-check” political ads? To do so, Facebook would need a staff that was a hundred times larger the staff of The New Yorker magazine, which is the Rolls Royce of fact-checking publications.

And good luck coming up with a definition of “hate speech” that everyone can agree upon.

As Jonathan Turley, a noted legal scholar and professor of law at George Washington University, recently wrote in USA Today, limiting free speech will not accomplish what its backers hope to achieve.

“These European laws allow the government to declare what speech is true and what is false,” Turley wrote. “None of this, mind you, has put a dent in the ranks of actual fascists and haters. Neo-Nazis are holding huge rallies by adopting new symbols and coded words while Germany arrested a man on a train because he had a Hitler ring tone on his phone.”

Turley cited recent polling of German citizens where only 18% of Germans feel free to express their opinions in public.  Just 17% feel free to opine on the Internet.

“That is the real success of hate speech laws,” Turley wrote. “These laws are so generally worded that no one can be sure that they are not committing a crime.”

Limiting hate speech and offensive language is a laudatory goal. But achieving that goal should be done by a civil society. Not by governmental fiat.

Must Read

Court Clears Mary Trump’s Tell-All Book for Publication, But Efforts Continue to Block Other Books

A New York appellate court lifted a restraining order on the publisher of Mary Trump’s explosive tell-all book, which apparently will describe a “nightmare...

New York Judge Temporarily Blocks Tell-All Book Authored by President Trump’s Niece

In at least a temporary blow to the First Amendment rights of free speech and a free press, a state court judge in Poughkeepsie,...

Trump Family Seeks to Silence One of Their Own: President’s Brother Sues to Prevent Publication of Tell-All Book by President’s Niece

Fresh off an unsuccessful bid to have a federal court block the publication of former National Security Advisor John Bolton’s tell-all book about the...

By Seeking to Block Publication of Two Books, Trump World Will Face the “Streisand Effect”

A couple of quick tips if you’re in the book publishing world: First tip: If you’re a giant New York-based book publisher, try to get...

Court Denies Government’s Request to Prevent Publication of John Bolton’s Tell-All Book About the Trump Administration

In a sigh of relief for proponents of the First Amendment, a federal court judge in Washington, D.C. denied the Trump Administration’s request for...