Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Tim Walz Is DEAD WRONG—Hate Speech, Misinfo Are PROTECTED Speech: Robby Soave" video.

@infinitytoinfinitysquaredb7836 Rachel Maddow is, instead, doing quite well.
9
Or the Republican. You expect Trump or Vance to protect our rights? Please.
3
@JayHayyy Well, considering how bad Harris and Walz are, it's dishonest to argue the point.
3
I can't believe my post concerning Supreme Court precedent on this very issue got thrown shade, only visible if you sort by Newest and scroll, and scroll.
2
@jeffreyblack6611 That depends on whether government coerces private actors to censor. It's not a simple inquiry.
2
There are categories of speech that are not protected, but "hate speech" isn't one of them. Lying, without more, isn't one of them, either.
2
It's being systematically undermined regardless.
1
The central "hate speech" case, RAV v. City of St. Paul, took place in Minnesota, and invalidated a "hate speech" ordinance. You would think the governor of Minnesota would have heard of it.
1
I can't believe that in 2024, people think they can understand First Amendment jurisprudence without reading a single Supreme Court case, or knowing that that is where it is found.
1
 @Musonius231 What do you mean?
1
@JayHayyy The central "hate speech" case, RAV v. City of St. Paul, took place in Minnesota, and invalidated a "hate speech" ordinance. You would think the governor of Minnesota would have heard of it. 😒
1
@I321Oo There is no such thing. That's a journalistic slogan.
1
The central "hate speech" case, RAV v. City of St. Paul, took place in Minnesota, and invalidated a "hate speech" ordinance. You would think the governor of Minnesota would have heard of it.
1
The central "hate speech" case, RAV v. City of St. Paul, took place in Minnesota, and invalidated a "hate speech" ordinance. You would think the governor of Minnesota would have heard of it.
1
@jeffreyblack6611 True
1