Monica Parks
East Brunswick High School
Wisconsin (D)
House of Representatives
Judiciary Committee
Hate Speech
Hate speech, n. – Bigoted speech attacking or disparaging a social or ethnic group
or a member of such a group (Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Law). Images of burning
crosses, swastikas, and violent "fighting words" come to mind when hate speech is
mentioned. Conversely, hate speech in the real world also occurs less dramatically –
anywhere from a crude hand gesture to a whispered slur. However hate speech offends its
victims, it is nevertheless protected by the Constitution. Abridging the right to freedom of
expression not only impairs the rights of the prejudiced, but it also weakens the rights of
those who simply want to express themselves. Limiting the freedom of speech will only
harm American freedom. To preserve the liberty that American citizens cherish, the
Committee on the Judiciary must vote to defend the right to express oneself.
The Supreme Court has been confronted frequently with cases regarding hate
speech. R.A.V. v. Saint Paul is perhaps one of the most controversial to date. Robert A.
Victoria burned a crude cross on the lawn of an African-American family
(http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/hatespeech.htm). They argued
that their actions were protected by the first amendment. However, the Court disagreed –
symbols like the burning cross are only constitutional when displayed publicly, such as in
a demonstration or a rally. When they encroach on private property, it is considered a
crime. This case brought to attention the fact that the term hate speech is not limited to
verbal attacks. The issue of spoken hate was addressed in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire,
in which Walter Chaplinsky, a Jehovah's Witness, verbally attacked a town marshal,
calling him "damned Fascist." His remarks were deemed fighting words, defined by the
Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Law as "words which by their very utterance are likely to
inflict harm on or provoke a breach of the peace by the average person to whom they are
directed." The Supreme Court must continue to defend the First Amendment, as they
have done for so many in the past.
The Constitution of the United States is the first to spring to the defense of
freedom of speech. Its controversial first amendment states that "Congress shall make no
law […] prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech." It is
this clause that has brought so many, fleeing tyranny, to the United States. However, this
right is continually threatened, especially on college campuses. Freedom of speech on
campus is strongly supported by many prominent organizations, including the American
Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU "believes that all campuses should adhere to First
Amendment principles because academic freedom is a bedrock of education in a free
society" (http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/expression). In the past, attempted solutions
proved unsuccessful. The most futile were campus speech codes, which in turn worked
against those they tried to protect. The failure of these codes was due to the fact that "
"the ultimate power to decide what speech is offensive and to whom rests with the
authorities – the government or a college administration – not with those who are the
alleged victims of hate speech" (http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/expression). The best
remedy for a situation such as this is to fight back with speech alone. On campus students
should create workshops to raise awareness about bigotry, the true cause of hate speech.
Past events demonstrate that speech regulation is not the solution for intolerance in the
United States.
In many European countries, hate speech has been banned. As a result of this,
there has been a steady rise in bigoted crimes. The only explicable reason for this is the
fact that if people are banned from expressing themselves verbally, they will find another
way to convey their beliefs. In Germany, anti-Semitic and xenophobic attacks spiked in
2002. Anti-Semitic incidents are up in Italy and Belgium, while in France the number of
anti-Semitic attacks increased dramatically. In England, anti-Semitic complaints have
increased nationwide (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/). One of the most tragic was
the 2003 burning of the Merkaz HaTorah Jewish School in Gagny, France. There are
currently no suspects in the arson of the yeshiva – however, in the preceding months;
students at the Merkaz HaTorah had been harassed on the subway, called "dirty Jews" by
teens of Arab and North African descent. The fire shocked the citizens of Gagny,
condensed by the words of math teacher Michaël Mimoun: "We were in a very calm
place here, a privileged place. Now we know there is no privileged place."
The citizens of the United States have always cherished their right to freedom of
expression. In limiting this, they will only find other ways to communicate their thoughts.
The obvious solution is to allow citizens to continue expressing themselves – in allowing
people to exercise their first amendment rights; it will facilitate the government in
monitoring those who may commit hate crimes in the future. The Committee on the
Judiciary must take the lead in defending the First Amendment.
Works Consulted
"Hate Speech on Campus." Online. Internet. http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/
expression/12808pub19941231.html. 30 March 2007.
Lee, Martin A. " With Times Tough, Fascism Coming Back." Los Angeles Times, 21
September 1997.
" Notable First Amendment Court Cases." Online. Internet.
http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/firstamendment/courtcases/courtcases.htm#ffe. 26
March 2007.
"R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, Minnesota." Online. Internet.
http://www.bc.edu/bc_
org/avp/cas/comm/ free_speech/rav.html. 2 April 2007.