Mediaboss Marketing

At a time in American politics when there is creeping advocacy for limits on offensive speech, it was reassuring to see a Supreme Court united in its reaffirming of the First Amendment.

The court ruled 8-0 that even trademarks considered to be derogatory are constitutionally protected forms of speech. The case before the court involved a musician who wanted to trademark his Asian-American rock bands name: The Slants.

The Patent and Trademark Office in 2011 declined the request, citing a federal law that prohibits the registration of any trademark that may disparage ... or bring ... into contempt[t] or disrepute any persons, living or dead.

The justices not only were unanimous in striking down the law and siding with the band, they did so on broad free-speech grounds, with Justices Samuel Alito and Anthony Kennedy writing in robust support of the First Amendment and against government attempts to censor unpopular opinions.

It offends a bedrock First Amendment principle: Speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend, Alito wrote.

Kennedy referenced the few categories of speech that the government can regulate or punish fraud, defamation or incitement before asserting: A law that can be directed against speech found offensive to some portion of the public can be turned against minority and dissenting views to the detriment of all.

Kennedys points resound in this age of attempts on campuses to silence invited speakers, college students seeking safe spaces from opinions contrary to their own, and with some alarming constitutional ignorance from people who should know better.

For example, in 2015 CNN journalist Chris Cuomo, who has a law degree, tweeted out: Hate speech is excluded from protection by the First Amendment. In April, Howard Dean, the former Vermont governor, presidential candidate and chair of the Democratic National Committee, tweeted: Hate speech is not protected by the first amendment (sic). In May, Ted Wheeler, the mayor of Portland, Oregon, urged the government not to issue permits to alt-right groups to demonstrate in public because hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that hate speech, no matter how bigoted or offensive, is free speech. Over the years it has upheld the rights of the Ku Klux Klan to march in public and the Westboro Baptist Church to picket the funerals of fallen soldiers with signs that display homophobic slurs. In order for speech to be lawfully banned, it must be a direct threat or inciting imminent lawless action.

The Supreme Courts decision almost certainly also applies to a more widely known case involving the NFLs Washington Redskins, whose trademarks were canceled in 2014 following complaints from Native Americans. But the justices struck a much larger blow against the pernicious idea that government can censor ideas based solely on their objectionable content.

This editorial was published by the Daytona Beach News Journal, a sister newspaper of the Daily News in Gatehouse Media.

Read the original post:
EDITORIAL: Court upholds free speech - The Northwest Florida Daily News