![]() ![]() First Amendment case law to pragmatic considerations, rather than a justified. Each of those writers has sought to create a theory of free speech - in particular, of the US first amendment - and from that theory has derived legal rules about speech. Thus, the argument ends in accepting the theoretical reasons for giving First Amendment protection to hate speech. The classic marketplace of ideas model argues that truth can be discovered through robust debate, free from governmental interference. Baker unconvincingly attributes the apparent focus on political speech in. Edwin Baker, Human Liberty and Freedom of. In response to this last point, however, the paper gives reasons to believe that the attempt to prohibit hate speech is more likely to exacerbate the risk of unacceptable outcomes than to generate the benign opposite. First Amendment law, as well as most normative discussions of. That is, the risk may justify prohibiting hate speech given its possible role in causing these consequences. Still, given the horrendous nature of the harm, caution suggests not taking the risk. The article then attempts to outline what empirical evidence would be needed to support this conclusion and gives reasons to doubt that this evidence has been or will be forthcoming. He argues that First Amendment liberty rights (as well as Fourteenth Amendment equality rights) required by political or moral theory. ![]() Own influential book Human Liberty and Freedom of Speech argued that the first justification for freedom of expression stands on protecting human liberty - the liberty theory - rather than the traditional marketplace of ideas rationale. Although an inchoate liberty theory of freedom of speech has deep roots in Supreme Court decisions and political history, it has been overshadowed in. In this book, Baker critiques the assumptions required by themarketplace of ideas theory and develops the liberty theory, showing its philosophical soundness, persuasiveness, and ability to protect free speech. The paper then notes that such a rationale will be unpersuasive to many (including this author) if the harms associated with a failure to outlaw hate speech are as great as often suggested – most dramatically, if the failure to prohibit makes a substantial contribution to the occurrence of serious racial/ethnic violence or genocide. Edwin Baker (1947-2009) became a leading First Amendment scholar. ![]() This paper describes the rationale that a full protection theory of free speech, a theory based on respect for individual autonomy, would give for protecting hate speech. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |