How Does Section 319 (2) Of The Criminal Code Prohibits Hate Propaganda

This paper will discuss how censorship denies citizens of the United States our full rights as delineated in the First Amendment. It will outline how and why the first amendment was created and included in the Constitution of the United States of America. This paper will also define censorship, discuss a select few legal cases surrounding freedom of speech and censorship as well as provide national and local examples of censorship.

In the “Bethel School District v. Fraser” case, Fraser believed that the school violated his first amendment “freedom of speech” rights. Fraser gave a speech with some inappropriate content in it and the school gave him a three day suspension because two teachers warned him before he gave the speech. Fraser took it to court and the justices said they would shorten the suspension and let him have his right to speak at graduation because the school was taking away his freedom of speech.

Steven Truscott, at the age of 14 years old, was sentenced to the death penalty for supposedly murdering his classmate, Lynn Harper. A short and unfair trial ensued that violated many rights given to this young man in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The rights that were violated include the right to not be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned, to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, a court concludes that evidence was obtained in a manner that infringed or denied any rights or freedoms guaranteed by this Charter, the evidence shall be excluded if it is established that, having regard to all the circumstances, the admission of it in the proceedings would bring the administration of justice into

There are many different perspectives on the issue of hate speech. Author of Hate Speech is Free Speech, Gov. Dean and Law professor, Glenn Harlan Reynolds, applies a strong historical perspective on the situation arguing that people are “constitutionally illiter[ate]” when they make the claim that hate speech is not part of the First Amendment. Believing that it is impossible to ban hate speech because everyone will always disagree with any idea, Reynolds focuses on the problems with banning hate speech and what might happen if hate

Rosenbaum did not share that his parents survived the holocaust, and that he is heavily involved in opposing the Nazi regime. He is a law professor in the U.S., and he was also visiting professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University in Israel, where he has been a frequent speaker, including at the annual Yom HaShoah Lecture hosted jointly by the American Society for Yad Vashem and Cardozo 's Program in Holocaust & Human Rights Studies on “Remember How the Law Went Horribly Wrong”; the 60th anniversary of the Nuremberg Trials on "A Reappraisal and Their Legacy"; and as the Uri & Caroline Bauer Distinguished Lecturer on Rosenbaum 's book, “The Myth of Moral Justice." Although he has credibility as a writer of the essay, he did not mention that he is professor heavily involved in the issue. His background shows that he is opposing the neo-Nazis rather than free speech.

Hate crime laws are defined as a state law that involves threats, harassment, or physical harm and is motivated by prejudice against someone's race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, sexual orientation or physical or mental disability. The 1968 statute made it a crime to use, or threaten to use, force to willfully interfere with any person because of race, color, religion, or national origin and because the person is participating in a federally protected activity, such as public education, employment, jury service, travel, or the enjoyment of public accommodations, or helping another person to do so. However, in 2009, Obama signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act. This made it easier to prosecute criminals while also adding in gender, disability, gender identity, or sexual orientation.

In 1998, Linda Hooper, the principal of Whitwell middle school, asked the ELA teacher and the assistant principal to start a Holocaust education class “that would be the basis for teaching tolerance and diversity”, according to the One Clip at a Time organization. Her reason was, “When the students, mostly white and Christian, struggled to grasp the concept and enormity of the six million Jews who died during the Holocaust, they decided to collect six million paper clips – one for each soul who perished.” Since Whitwell was located in the heart of the Bible Belt, many of its citizens were prejudiced against the Jewish religion. Some of the citizens also didn’t know of or about the Holocaust, or some didn’t believe it happened. Over the span of four years, the students and faculty of Whitwell Middle School worked hard to teach the town and at the same time, learn themselves, about the Holocaust and invalidate the preconceptions about Jews. In doing so, the students and staff fought against intolerance and were also able to teach others all around the world with the influence of their “six million paper clips”

In the case McCann v. The Ottawa Sun, 1993 CanLII 5507 (ON SC), the General Division of the Ontario Court was correct when stating the published words by The Ottawa Sun were insufficient to carry the Mayor of Pembroke’s action of defamation. At the same time, the columnist’s comments can be considered a humorous remark, which is a prove individuals in Canada have freedom of speech, which is the ability to communicate ideas without the interference of the state.

In 1988, two years after the Bethel School District v Fraser case, another public school petitioned the United States Supreme Court regarding an action of censorship decided by the school against the school student’s journal. Known as Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier , this case will be analyzed by the US Supreme Court justices, mostly, in reference to the Bethel School District v Fraser case. The precedent of Bethel School District v Fraser case’s ruling has heavily weighted on Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier case in a sense that, once again, the Court has decided to overturn a decision of a Court of Appeals, and pronounced a verdict in favor of the School District. In fine, the United States Supreme Court will rule that a school has a censorship power, which, it could fully and reasonably exercise against the freedom

Background Information: Cathy Kuhlmeier was a high school student at Hazelwood High School. Her and her friends were writers in the school newspaper. The schools news paper was written, edited and published by the students. Before publishing it was sent to the principal to look over. The principal found two article that he thought were inappropriate and said couldn't be published. Kuhlmeier and her classmates were outraged and brought this case to Supreme Court.

considered to be speech that could not be banned according to the First Amendment. They were

The case of Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District is an important piece of history regarding the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and how it applies to students ' right to freedom of speech. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech", and the Supreme Court has the job to judge whether or not the laws violate the Constitutional Amendments.

- pg 111 “By the mid nineties, the issue couldn’t exclude religious speakers from the list” The new look of religious cases allowed for people to go against the law of religious freedom.

First Amendment rights are guaranteed to all American citizens, but current free speech issues are testing Constitutional boundaries. Where must the line be drawn between free speech and infringement upon others’ rights? Is there some speech so cruel and so appalling that it does not merit protection? These issues have been raised by the recent activities of the Westboro Baptist Church. Based out of Topeka, Kansas[1], this small group of radicals is marked by their hateful views and their contempt for homosexuality. The Westboro Baptist Church has gained notoriety and sparked national outrage with their offensive acts, particularly by protesting the funerals of fallen soldiers. However, despite the distasteful nature of the Church’s

On the sidewalks of Rochester in the year 1942, Walter Chaplinsky was arrested for repeating 'You are a God damned racketeer' and 'a damned Fascist’ to a police officer. Chaplinsky’s statements violated a New Hampshire law prohibiting offensive, derisive, or annoying words or sounds said unto an individual or party in a public place. He appealed the decision of the District Court, and when it came to the Supreme Court, they came to a profound decision. Supreme Court Justice Murphy said there are certain words that could reasonably result in a fight or a breach of peace when uttered. These “fighting words” are not protected under the first Amendment. Fighting words shouldn’t be a constitutional issue because people are allowed to speak, even is it will cause a flare in tempers.