Jimzz
Diamond Member
- Oct 23, 2012
- 4,399
- 190
- 106
There is literally hundred years of Supreme Court precedents showing this kinda stuff is NOT protected speech. See yelling fire in theater, inciting riot, "fighting words" etc.
I don't know where people get this idiotic notion that anything coming out of your mouth is constitutionally protected.
And you would be wrong, there is SC precedents showing he is protected.
Brandenburg Vs Ohio
"The Court held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is directed to inciting, and is likely to incite, imminent lawless action. Specifically, it struck down Ohio's criminal syndicalism statute, because that statute broadly prohibited the mere advocacy of violence."
"Other courts consider a series of factors in determining whether speech constitutes a true threat, including (1) the reaction of the recipient of the speech; (2) whether the threat was conditional; (3) whether the speaker communicated the speech directly to the recipient; (4) whether the speaker had made similar statements in the past; and (5) whether the recipient had reason to believe the speaker could engage in violence."
He didn't actually make a threat, he just said "put wings on pigs". This is not a threat, thought it could be considered incitement to violence. However, incitement to violence is generally protected if there is no incitement to imminent harm.
