-Caveat Lector- Euphorian spotted this on the Guardian Unlimited site and thought you should see it.
To see this story with its related links on the Guardian Unlimited site, go to http://www.guardian.co.uk Supreme court to decide on Klan's burning cross Is it freedom of speech or incitement to violence? Julian Borger in Washington Tuesday December 10 2002 The Guardian The US supreme court will today hear arguments about whether the public burning of wooden crosses by the Ku Klux Klan is an incitement to racial violence or constitutionally-protected free expression. The sight of burning crosses near black homes was once a menacing icon of the South. According to Klan lore, the practice originated as a means of gathering ancient Scottish clans, but in the South they were used to scare blacks into fleeing from white neighbourhoods. Two recent cases have reopened the racially charged debate that pits freedom of speech against freedom from intimidation. In one, three white teenagers in Virginia put together an improvised cross and tried to set it alight outside the home of a black neighbour four years ago. In the other, also from Virginia in 1998, a white supremacist, Elton Black, was charged with cross-burning at a Klan rally on private land with the owners' consent, but in a spot where it could be seen from a public road a mile away, drawing complaints from neighbours. In Virginia, as in some other states, the public burning of crosses is banned, but in other states it is legal. The discrepancy arises from different interpretations of the US constitution's first amendment, which forbids laws "abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press". The Supreme Court last addressed the issue ten years ago, when it overturned a cross-burning ban in Minnesota arguing that the ban was a form of discrimination. Virginia, Florida, California and Washington, have pointed to another Supreme Court ruling, that "hate speech" in the course of a crime could be considered an aggravating factor in sentencing. They argue that the 1992 decision does not protect people who burn crosses as a deliberate threat. "A burning cross - standing alone and without explanation - is understood in our society as a message of intimidation," Virginia's attorney general, Jerry Kilgore, argued in court documents. In both the current cases, the federal government favours state prosecutors arguing that intimidation was "not protected speech". Lawyers for the defendants say that the case against their clients is discriminatory, pointing out that the law in Virginia does not ban the burning of circles or squares. According to the defence case submitted to the Supreme Court: "It is but a short step from the banning of offending symbols such as burning crosses or burning flags to the banning of offending words." Mr Kilgore argues that the significance of the burning cross sets it apart. He said that even a white man would feel threatened if he woke up and found a burning cross in his garden. Jonathan Turley, a law professor, said the supreme court has a record of being extremely protective of the right to free speech, but said it might choose to distinguish between the Black case, where the cross was used in the course of a meeting, and the other case - in which it was targeted against an individual. "The cases offer the court a great amount of flexibility if it wants to develop a new rule," Prof Turley said. Copyright Guardian Newspapers Limited <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
