Quran burning and US law
Al Jazeera explains why a pastor's controversial plans to burn copies of
the Quran are legal under American law.
Last Modified: 09 Sep 2010
As a fringe Florida pastor courts global controversy by pushing ahead with
plans to burn copies of the Quran, many in the Islamic world will be
looking on and asking why the US government does not simply ban the event from
taking place.
After all, Barack Obama has warned that violence could erupt as the pastor
hands what the US president describes as a "recruiting bonanza" to
al-Qaeda, and millions of Muslims around the world are likely to take serious
offence at such an act. Surely there is a simple answer; just prevent Terry
Jones from carrying out his plan.
But the First Amendment to the US constitution, one of the sacrosanct
documents of the American bill of rights, prevents the government from
interfering in personal freedom of expression, assembly and religion. In the
US,
the right to express oneself- no matter how offensive that expression might
be- is seen as a fundamental part of what it is to be American.
So while authorities in the US can condemn the Quran-burning event in the
strongest possible terms - and they have, from the US president downwards -
they have no legal power to stop it from happening.
Freedom of expression
The US constitution's first amendment reads: "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of
the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a
redress of grievances."
It comes down to a simple principle; that US law allows people to hold
whatever views they want and to express those views in almost any way they
chose.
"In a free society, at least in this free society, people have a right to
be intolerant morons and there's no question that this pastor is all of
that," Bob Corn-Revere, a First Amendment lawyer and partner at Davis Wright
Tremaine LLP, told the Reuters news agency. "He is an ignorant, intolerant
moron, but he's protected by the law."
This "tolerance for intolerance" is an intrinsic part of American democracy
- and will be respected even if, as in this case, there appears to be a
genuine risk of violence or even death as a result of the pastor's actions.
Slippery slope
Defenders of the US constitution argue the protection the First Amendment
provides outweighs the credible threat that abuse of the right can pose.
"That's the slippery slope about the First Amendment; if you permit common
sense to prevail over principle, then you start giving up the principle,"
Gregg Thomas, partner at Thomas & LoCicero, told Reuters.
"The values that are embedded in the First Amendment long-term - while
maybe not in this immediate circumstance - are so valuable to our democracy
that you just can't change the rules when it gets tough," he added.
So by simply announcing the "International Burn a Quran Day" on his
property, Jones has so far not committed any crime. The only crime he could be
charged with is the relatively minor offence of building an open-air fire
without a license to do so.
Jones has been turned down for a "burn permit" from local authorities, but
even that could be legally risky, Corn-Revere said. "If you restrict
someone's burn permit, not because the fire is a threat to the safety of
people
around, but because you don't like what is being burned, then that becomes a
First Amendment issue," he said.
Laws do exist in the US that prohibit the "incitement of violence," but
lawyers said it might be difficult to apply that to Jones' mere announcement
that he was going to burn the Quran.
In the US, certain freedoms lie at the heart of the social system. The
right to offend people by the expression of controversial views is one of
them, and that is not up for debate.
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
