By Ivan Hare, James Weinstein
Dedication to unfastened speech is a basic principle of all liberal democracies. besides the fact that, democracies can vary considerably whilst addressing the constitutionality of legislation regulating definite different types of speech. within the usa, for example, the dedication to loose speech lower than the 1st modification has been held via the ultimate court docket to guard the general public expression of the main noxious racist ideology and accordingly to render unconstitutional even slim regulations on hate speech. by contrast, governments were accorded massive leeway to limit racist and different severe expression in virtually any other democracy, together with Canada, the uk, and different ecu nations. This ebook considers the felony responses of assorted liberal democracies in the direction of hate speech and different kinds of utmost expression, and examines the next questions:
What bills for the marked alterations in angle in the direction of the constitutionality of hate speech rules?
Does hate speech law violate the middle unfastened speech precept constitutive of democracy?
Has the conventional US place on severe expression justifiably no longer came across prefer in other places?
Do values corresponding to the dedication to equality or dignity legitimately override the precise to loose speech in a few conditions?
With contributions from specialists in a number of disciplines, this booklet bargains an in-depth exam of the tensions that come up among democracy's supplies.
Read or Download Extreme Speech and Democracy PDF
Best constitutional law books
This ebook examines the "constitutional faith" that has, considering 1788, been a significant part of American "civil faith. " through taking heavily the parallel among wholehearted attractiveness of the structure and non secular religion, Sanford Levinson opens up a bunch of interesting questions on what it capability to be American.
European Consensus and the Legitimacy of the European Court of Human Rights
With a purpose to be potent, overseas tribunals will be perceived as valid adjudicators. ecu Consensus and the Legitimacy of the eu court docket of Human Rights offers in-depth analyses on no matter if ecu consensus is in a position to improving the legitimacy of the ecu courtroom of Human Rights (ECtHR).
Constitutionalism, Identity, Difference, and Legitimacy: Theoretical Perspectives
Curiosity in constitutionalism and within the dating between constitutions, nationwide id, and ethnic, spiritual, and cultural range has soared because the cave in of socialist regimes in japanese Europe and the previous Soviet Union. on account that international struggle II there has additionally been a proliferation of latest constitutions that vary in numerous crucial respects from the yank structure.
Dedication to loose speech is a basic principle of all liberal democracies. even if, democracies can vary considerably while addressing the constitutionality of legislation regulating definite sorts of speech. within the usa, for example, the dedication to loose speech less than the 1st modification has been held by way of the excellent court docket to guard the general public expression of the main noxious racist ideology and accordingly to render unconstitutional even slim regulations on hate speech.
- Executive Measures, Terrorism and National Security: Have the Rules of the Game Changed?
- Erotic Justice: Law and the New Politics of Postcolonialism
- Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America
- The Failed Promise of Originalism
- Judge and Jurist: Essays in Memory of Lord Rodger
Extra info for Extreme Speech and Democracy
Example text
332, 349 Conterm Ltd v Ministry of Finance, Department of Customs and VAT [1998] IscSC 52(1) 289 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 Daher v Minister of Interior HCJ 448/85 [1986] IsrSC 40(2) 701 . . . . . . . . . 346 Dayan v Wilk, Jerusalem District Commander HCJ 2481/93 [1994] IsrSC 48(2) 456 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 346, 347 Disenchik v Attorney General CrimA 126/62 [1963] IsrSC 17(1) 179 . . . . . . . . 346 Golan v Prison Services PPA 4463/94 [1996] IsrSC 50(4) 136 .
412 xxxiv Table of Cases R (Pro-Life Alliance) v British Broadcasting Corporation [2003] UKHL 23, [2004] AC 185 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321–322, 622, 624 R (Ullah) v Special Adjudicator [2004] UKHL 26; [2004] 2 AC 323 . . . . . . . . 43 R (Watkins Singh) v Governing Body of Aberdale Girls’ High School and Rhondda Cynon Taf Unitary Authority [2008] EWHC 1865 . . . . 420 R (on the application of Boyd Hunt) v ITC [2002] EWHC 2296 . . . .
11 Denmark Penal Code s 140 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 s 266(b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 132 Estonia Constitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240 France Constitution, 1958 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229, 420, 575 Art 89 .