As we watch the court cases regarding the attempted coup of Jan 6th, and listen to the “free speech” prattling’s of Conservatives who are appalled that private industry isn’t obligated to up-hold the same First Amendment purism as the government (meaning Donald Trump’s Facebook and Twitter bans), it would be useful to consider what restrictions on your free speech the government actually endorses.

 

The key case is Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), a landmark decision that held that inflammatory speech cannot be legitimately criminalized unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action." It is important to remember that Brandenburg was a Liberal decision, radically expanding your protection from finding that your speech was criminalized as compared to the previous standards.

 

Now, a few quotes from the on-going court cases against the participants in the failed Coup. These quotes all concern Donald Trump’s speech, before, during, and even now:

 

“It’s not as if the effort by some political leaders and media figures to stoke this sort of anger has abated in any way, Isn’t it fair to say that the same political issues and the same political concerns are being pumped out into the airways on a daily basis?”

Judge Amy Berman Jackson

 

“The Court is not convinced that dissatisfaction and concern about the legitimacy of the election results has dissipated for all Americans. Former President Donald J. Trump continues to make forceful public comments about the ‘stolen election,’ chastising individuals who did not reject the supposedly illegitimate results that put the current administration in place … The unfounded allegations are out there, and they’re being made constantly by the former President.”

 

Judge Emmett Sullivan

 

“The defendant is of course entitled to his political preferences. But given his prior acts of traveling across the country with weapons to ‘stop the steal’ and interfering with the peaceful transition of power on behalf of his idol and his idol’s continued inflammatory rhetoric about a stolen election, the defendant continues to pose a concrete and articulable threat to the community.”

 

Prosecutors in the case against Nathaniel DeGrave

 

 

 

 

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Escape From New York (1981)

Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens (2015)

The Tomb of Ligeia (1965)