re: Arizona Man Arrested After Black Youtuber Recorded Him Using Racial Slurs

They are just words. If a black man called a white man a cracker do you think he should be arrested? Of course you don’t because the “N” word is the only slur that matters. Pathetic!

quote:

---

I believe the you are misspelling Joe Biden’s name

---

In case you didn't know, El Gaucho is a sarcasm account. I don't think he has one non-sarcastic post in his history.

quote:

---

Do you have any precedent where a disorderly conduct statute has been struck down for similar language? Most jurisdictions have something similar in the DC statutes.

---

Just because a jurisdiction has a law on the books doesn't make that law legal. In December 2015 Michigan's court struck down a long-standing statute which read "Any person who shall use any indecent, immoral, obscene, vulgar or insulting language in the presence or hearing of any woman or child shall be guilt of a misdemeanor." A state appeals court ruled the law was unconstitutional in People v. Boomer (2002).

Cohen v. California (1971) allows for profane language, with Justice Harlan reasoning that "while the particular four-letter word being litigated here (frick) is perhaps more distasteful than most others of its genre, it is nevertheless often true that one man's vulgarity is another's lyric" and that "governments might soon seize upon the censorship of particular words as being a convenient guise for banning the expression of unpopular views."

This was after Watts v United States (1969) which established that profane rants that cross the line into direct face-to-face personal insults (or "fighting words") are not protected by the First Amendment.

There is some room to say Watts still has weight, but it can just as easily be argued that Justice Harlan's reasoning on Cohen supersedes that.

quote:

---

so, you're cool with racial slurs? ...k

---

Holy mother of conflation Batman!

Two completely separate issues here. Few if any are ok with racial slurs. 100% should be against having the 1st Amendment violated! I am not one who goes around tossing out 1st Amendment violation claims either as sometimes private companies censor speech and then are accused of 1A violations but from my reading of this is a clear violation of 1A rights when the government steps in over offensive language. Unless the racist was directly threatening the other person, it should not be arrest worthy.