Brush up on yours, you are way out of your depth here. The racist chant on a private bus party was not even close to fighting words. If it is litigated, almost certainly will be found to be protected speech and strict scrutiny applied.Jaylan said:I say again, brush up on your Con Law. Fighting words is not protected speech. So what rights are infringed upon here?
Inapposite cite, no speech was "addressed" to anyone, but good to see the LW grievance industry is working overtime grasping at straws to sensationalize this utter nonevent that has gotten WAY too much press in a country where real crimes are ignored by the press daily in favor of sensationalist tripe such as this. Here's an actual dispositive case you would do well to read carefully, then get back to us with your retraction:Jaylan said:Read the fvking case of Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942). These frat kids were joyfully signing about lynching. THATS WHY fighting words applies here. Who gives a fvk if its in private. Its violent language. Let them do that at a private club...not within a frat on a public university.
http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/doe.html
Always interesting to see that as the left considers it, free speech is only -their- speech, all others are suspect. Interesting to see the extent to which emotions trump our foundational civil rights and the rule of law whenever someone says something people don't like.