Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T11:42:20.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hate speech and the normative foundations of regulation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2013

Eric Heinze
Eric Heinze*
Affiliation:
School of Law, Queen Mary, University of London*
*
e.heinze@qmul.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Racist incidents on American university campuses in the 1980s triggered a storm of publications by scholars who coined the phrase ‘hate speech’ for the legal lexicon. Some of the offences had already been subject to legal or institutional penalties for harassment or vandalism. Several universities nevertheless adopted broad codes of conduct to penalise hateful expression. For two decades, however, the US Supreme Court had been marching in the opposite direction. It was interpreting the Constitution's First Amendment to prevent federal or state government from punishing speakers solely on grounds of the viewpoints they express.

Type
Review essay
Information
International Journal of Law in Context , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , December 2013 , pp. 590 - 617
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baker, C. Edwin (2009) ‘Autonomy and Hate Speech’, in Hare, Ivan and Weinstein, James (eds), Extreme Speech and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 139–57.Google Scholar
BBC News (2006) ‘Protester “called for beheadings”’. Report of 2 November 2006. Online: <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6113874.stm> (last accessed 10 November 2013).+(last+accessed+10+November+2013).>Google Scholar
Benz, Wolfgang (2005) Was ist Antisemitismus? (2nd edn). Munich: Beck.Google Scholar
Boyle, Kevin (2001) ‘Hate Speech: The United States versus the Rest of the World?’, Maine Law Review 53: 487–502.Google Scholar
Brecht, Bertholt (1957) Schriften zum Theater: Über eine nicht-aristotelische Dramatik. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Brettschneider, Cory (2012) When the State Speaks, What Should It Say? How Democracies Can Protect Expression and Promote Equality. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Butler, Judith (1997) Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Coltman, Viccy (2006) Fabricating the Antique: Neoclassicism in Britain. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Delgado, Richard and Stefancic, Jean (2004) Understanding Words that Wound. Boulder, CO: Perseus.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques (1967a) De la grammatologie. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques (1967b) L’Écriture et la difference. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques (1972) ‘La pharmacie de Platon’, in Derrida, JacquesLa dissémination. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 77–213.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald (2009) ‘Foreword’, in Hare, Ivan and Weinstein, James (eds), Extreme Speech and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, v−ix.Google Scholar
Fenwick, Helen (2002) Civil Liberties and Human Rights. 3rd ed. Oxford: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fish, Stanley (1994) There's No Such Thing as Free Speech: And It's a Good Thing, Too. New York: Oxford Paperbacks.Google Scholar
Grimm, Dieter (2009) ‘Freedom of Speech in a Globalized World’, in Hare, Ivan and Weinstein, James (eds), Extreme Speech and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 11–22.Google Scholar
Hare, Ivan and Weinstein, James (eds) (2009) Extreme Speech and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich (1970 [1835–38]) ‘Vorlesungen über die Ästhetik I’, in Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: Werke (Vol. 13). Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Heinze, Eric (2008) ‘Truth and Myth in Critical Race Theory and LatCrit: Human Rights and the Ethnocentrism of Anti-Ethnocentrism’, National Black Law Journal 20: 107–62.Google Scholar
Heinze, Eric (2009a) ‘Imperialism and Nationalism in Early Modernity: The “Cosmopolitan” and The “Provincial” in Shakespeare's Cymbeline’, Journal of Social and Legal Studies 18: 139–68.Google Scholar
Heinze, Eric (2009b) ‘“Were it not against our laws”: Oppression and Resistance in Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors’, Legal Studies 29: 230–63.Google Scholar
Heinze, Eric (2010) ‘“He'd turn the world itself into a prison”: Empire and Enlightenment in Jean Racine's Alexander the Great’, Law and Humanities 4: 63–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinze, Eric (2013) The Concept of Injustice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Heinze, Eric (2014, forthcoming) Citizenship Unmodified: Democracy and the Problem of Hatred.Google Scholar
Holz, Klaus (2005) Die Gegenwart des Antisemitismus. Islamistische, demokratische und antizionistische Judenfeindschaft. Hamburg: Hamburger Edition.Google Scholar
Imbleau, Martin (2003) La négation du génocide nazi, liberté d'expression ou crime raciste?: Le négationnisme de la Shoah en droit international et comparé. Paris: L'Harmattan.Google Scholar
Lebreton, Gilles (1999) Libertés publiques et droits de l'homme (4th edn). Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Lewis, Anthony (2008) Freedom for the Thought We Hate: A Biography of the First Amendment. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Matsuda, Mari J. (1993) ‘Public Response to Racist Speech: Considering the Victim's Story’, in Matsuda, Mari J., Lawrence, Charles R. III, Delgado, Richard and Crenshaw, Kimberlé Williams (eds) Words That Wound: Critical Race Theory, Assaultive Speech, and the First Amendment. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 17–51.Google Scholar
Matsuda, Mari J., Lawrence, Charles R. III, Delgado, Richard and Crenshaw, Kimberlé Williams (eds) (1993) Words That Wound: Critical Race Theory, Assaultive Speech, and the First Amendment. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart (1982 [1869]) On Liberty, ed. Himmelfarb, G.. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Mirovalev, Mansur (2013) ‘Russia Moves to Enact Anti-gay Law Nationwide’, Yahoo! News report of 21 January 2013 (Associated Press). Online: <http://news.yahoo.com/russia-moves-enact-anti-gay-law-nationwide-125825051.html> (last accessed 10 November 2013).+(last+accessed+10+November+2013).>Google Scholar
Plato (1997 [c. 380 BC]) Plato: Complete Works, ed. Cooper, J. M.. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
Post, Robert (1995) Constitutional Domains: Democracy, Community, Management. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Post, Robert (2009) ‘Hate Speech’, in Hare, Ivan and Weinstein, James (eds), Extreme Speech and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 123–38.Google Scholar
Post, Robert (2011) ‘Participatory Democracy and Free Speech’, Virginia Law Review 97: 477–90.Google Scholar
Rawls, John (1999) A Theory of Justice (2nd edn). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Robert, Jacques and Duffar, Jean (1996) Droits de l'homme et libertés fondamentales. Paris: Montchrestien.Google Scholar
Röpke, Andrea and Speit, Andreas (2005) Braune Kameradschaften. Die militanten Neonazis im Schatten der NPD (2nd edn). Berlin: Links Verlag.Google Scholar
Russia News (2012) ‘Putin Denounces Opponents Who Receive Foreign Aid.’ Report of 12 December 2012. Online: <http://www.russianews.net/index.php/sid/211339569/scat/723971d98160d438> (last accessed 10 November 2013).+(last+accessed+10+November+2013).>Google Scholar
Schrank, Carsten (2006) Rechts-Staat Deutschland? Zum Kampf der Justiz gegen Rechtsextremisten . Norderstedt: Books on Demand.Google Scholar
Staud, Toralf (2006) Moderne Nazis: Die neuen Rechten und der Aufstieg der NPD (3rd edn). Cologne: Kiepenheuer und Witsch.Google Scholar
Taguieff, Pierre-André (2002) La Nouvelle judéophobie. Paris: Mille et Une Nuits.Google Scholar
Taguieff, Pierre-André (2004) Prêcheurs de haine: Traversée de la judéophobie planétaire. Paris: Mille et Une Nuits.Google Scholar
United nations (2002) Report of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
Vaneigem, Raoul (2003) Rien n'est sacré, tout peut se dire: Réflexions sur la liberté d'expression. Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy and Weinstein, James (2012) The Legal Response to Hate Speech: Should the U.S. be more like Europe? Available at: <http://online.law.asu.edu/Events/2012/HateSpeach/>>Google Scholar
Weinstein, James (2009a) ‘Extreme Speech, Public Order, and Democracy’, in Hare, Ivan and Weinstein, James (eds), Extreme Speech and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 23–61.Google Scholar
Weinstein, James (2009b) ‘An Overview of American Free Speech Doctrine and its Application to Extreme Speech’, in Hare, Ivan and Weinstein, James (eds), Extreme Speech and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 81–95.Google Scholar
Weinstein, James and Hare, Ivan (2009) ‘General Introduction’, in Hare, Ivan and Weinstein, James (eds), Extreme Speech and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–7.Google Scholar
Wijnberg, Robert (2008) In Dubio: Vrijheid van meningsuiting als het recht om te twijfelen. Amsterdam: Prometheus.Google Scholar