Hate crime What distinguishes a hate crime from other crimes is an underlying motivation based on the victim’s group membership. There has been much debate over the constitutionality of hate crime laws and which groups (if any) should be protected by such legislation. Those against hate crime laws argue that it is a violation of First Amendment protections of free, association, and freedom of thought. The Supreme Court confirmed that freedom of thought is implied by the First Amendment in R.A.V. v. St. Paul which those against hate crime laws argue makes such laws unconstitutional.
A speech code is any university policy that forbids the use of hateful or contemptuous expressions towards any social group, particularly those categorized based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, religion, etc. In this essay, I will explain why such regulations are justifiable for the reasons that Charles R. Lawrence Ⅲ states in Racist Speech as the Functional Equivalent of Fighting Words. He argues that speech codes “[do] nothing more than prohibit intentional face-to-face insults”(pg 175), and that “racial insults are undeserving of First Amendment protection because the perpetrator’s intention is not to discover truth or initiate dialogue, but to injure the victim.”(pg 175) A prime reason for many universities
Pros and Cons of Hate Crime Laws 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.
However, besides the student’s request to see this as a racist act, we should also determine whether this incident is to be labeled as racist using Blum’s definition of the word “racist.”
King writes to the eight clergymen who were critical of his protests and to the indifferent people of the United States. In the essay, he claims that he has done nothing wrong by protesting peacefully. In paragraph 11, King says “freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.” He is saying that freedom is something they have to fight for because the authorities will not give it to them. He is directing this statement at the clergymen while reaching the apathetic people of the United States.
The book, “America Swastika: Inside the white power movement’s hidden spaces of hate” by Pete Simi and Robert Futrell, was written 2010. I chose this book because I am interested in learning about why these racist groups have so much hate towards another race or group. Personally, I do not condone racism because it does not make sense to me as to how one person can hate another one without knowing them. I wanted to learn about how people who are in groups such as, the Ku Klux Klan, live in our country which is identified as a melting pot. White power movements are talked about in our history books and are explained as if they are in the past, but they aren’t.
To summarize the article “Racial Profiling is Morally Wrong and Based on False Assumptions”, by James A. Kowalski, he argues that racial profiling is by no means effective, or good. It solves no problems, and causes people to fear law enforcement. Racial profiling is when an individual is suspected of a crime by law enforcement because of their race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. For example, “all blacks are gang members”. In addition to Kowalski’s arguments, he references the Zimmerman case from 2012 as an example of racial profiling gone wrong.
The farmers of the Constitution feared that the American government would abuse their power similar to governments they dealt with in their past. With this in mind, the farmers of the Constitution created unalienable rights for all American citizens to protect us. Public entities are not sanctioned to dismiss rights of people/students whenever they see fit. Consequently, when the state decides to empower public school officials to suspend students without a hearing or notice they are entering in illegal territory.
They named this case Tinker v. Des Moines because Eckhardt was a hard name to pronounce, and the Tinker family was more involved in the case. On November 12, 1968, The District Court sided with the Tinker family. They were able to recognized the wearing of the armband for the purpose of peaceful protesting. But, The school was not ready to give up. The 8th Circuit Court Appeals in Iowa sided with the school officials by saying the black armbands were inappropriate for the school.
This essay will be telling the audience about the type of bad authority which includes being racist, abusive, and not helping someone for their race. In my opinion, a bad authority should not be able to work in the place of protecting the citizens. A bad authority would be racist to any group of people. Although Donald Trump is the president, he is racist towards certain religions, but some American citizens still support him. Donald Trump is saying "Let 's make America great again" but deporting immigrants and Muslims will not make "America great again".
3 We pause here to not that the term-radicalized communities are used rather than terms such as “visible minorities”, “persons of color” or “non-white persons” (Bahdi, Parsons, Sandborn). I believe that it should be illegal to discriminate and profile against a group of people or an individual due to their skin color or features that they have because it is violating their human
As an advocate for human rights, I take injustice that is targeted against a race or individual resolutely. Commonly, people make rude and insensitive remarks without remorse. Unfortunately, these remarks are made by influential American icons. Ben Carson, candidate for the presidential election, stated that he does not agree in having a Muslim president. When asked why, he responded with, "if you accept the tenets of Islam that you would be incapable by abiding under the Constitution.
The Melton v. Young case is about a high school student that was suspended for wearing a jacket with a Confederate flag. The issue that was discussed is, whether or not the school officials could suspend a student for wearing Confederate flag. The clothing sparking racial tension was also discussed. The racial tension from the previous year was an argument for the defense because it can be said that the jacket could have refueled this. The defense also stated that the Melton family was informed of the new rules and chose to break them.
Whether laws intend to limit the offensive power of a minority or protect a minority from attacks, either way rights are lost. In the words of Roger Baldwin, founder of the civil liberties union, “In order to defend the people you like, you have to defend the people you hate.” Roger Baldwin’s statement indicates that if we limit the free speech of one group we ultimately limit our own freedoms. The first Amendment clearly states the limiting of any groups right is unconstitutional, “make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.” The basis behind not allowing the government to define free speech allows Americans to create their own social order and among themselves determine what is acceptable.
What are the arguments that support the Supreme Court 's ruling in favor of Phelps? The arguments that supported the supreme court are that they were attending a public event, they were protesting from a far distance that was approved by the state of maryland, the had organized the protest with the local police department and did not interrupt the service. What are some arguments in support of Snyder, the soldier 's father who claims he was harmed by the Phelps ' protest?