U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Today, 05:04 AM
 
Location: *
8,160 posts, read 2,460,908 times
Reputation: 2243

Advertisements

National Civil Rights Organization Wins Lawsuit Against Daily Stormer and White Supremacists Engaging in Online Threats and Harassment

In a landmark decision, court rules that hateful online trolling can constitute interference with the equal enjoyment of public accommodations.

Quote:
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that white supremacists who used social media to threaten and harass the first African American female student body president of American University were liable for over $700,000 in damages and attorneys’ fees.
"This ruling is historic in that it marks the first time that a court has deemed racist online trolling activity that can interfere with one’s equal access to a public accommodation. The Court’s ruling recognizes the real-world damage done when bigots take to the internet to target and threaten African Americans and other people of color,” said Kristen Clarke, President and Executive Director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. “This ruling should send a strong message to other white supremacists that they can and will be held accountable for hateful activity that constitutes unlawful discrimination, no matter whether it occurs online or in the real world.”

https://goodmenproject.com/featured-...arassment-wcz/

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/10/u...r-dumpson.html

I wonder who will hear this message?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Today, 05:22 AM
 
19,704 posts, read 12,409,299 times
Reputation: 10876
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
National Civil Rights Organization Wins Lawsuit Against Daily Stormer and White Supremacists Engaging in Online Threats and Harassment

In a landmark decision, court rules that hateful online trolling can constitute interference with the equal enjoyment of public accommodations.



"This ruling is historic in that it marks the first time that a court has deemed racist online trolling activity that can interfere with one’s equal access to a public accommodation. The Court’s ruling recognizes the real-world damage done when bigots take to the internet to target and threaten African Americans and other people of color,” said Kristen Clarke, President and Executive Director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. “This ruling should send a strong message to other white supremacists that they can and will be held accountable for hateful activity that constitutes unlawful discrimination, no matter whether it occurs online or in the real world.”

https://goodmenproject.com/featured-...arassment-wcz/

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/10/u...r-dumpson.html

I wonder who will hear this message?


While such sentiments are impolite and not acceptable, a legal ruling against the idiot is an infringement on the first amendment. In reading the article, it looks like the group threatened her with violence, which, of course, is illegal. It will be interesting to see what is parsed out on appeal as what constituted free speech and what was a true physical threat.


I am really surprised that the ACLU has not taken this case up on an appeal, as it will be interesting. Hate groups everywhere, like ANTIFA, BLM, SPLC, KKK, and neo Nazi groups should take notice of this ruling, as it will have precedence in future cases.


Despite language being objectionable, citizens should have the right to say whatever they want, as long as it is not causing damage to someone. Hurting their feelings should not be illegal. They really crossed the line with the threats, however.


There was a similar case tried locally in which a student dressed in a gorilla suit and offered bananas to BLM members who were protesting on campus. Ultimately, the defendant was found innocent, as he did not harm or threaten the BLM protesters. Certainly the guy was an idiot, but being stupid is not illegal.


One thing that I think is interesting is that the action taken by the group was against a college student (a kid). It similarly always shocks me when I attend a college football game and hear some of the terrible things said to the players on the bench (the seats are ten feet away from the player's bench in this stadium). They are kids, for Christ's sake, and adults are saying these things to them. When they pull off their helmets, there is just a kid looking back at you, not some inanimate monster in a uniform. Have some civility.

Last edited by hawkeye2009; Today at 05:36 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:38 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
67,138 posts, read 34,170,157 times
Reputation: 14449
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
National Civil Rights Organization Wins Lawsuit Against Daily Stormer and White Supremacists Engaging in Online Threats and Harassment

In a landmark decision, court rules that hateful online trolling can constitute interference with the equal enjoyment of public accommodations.



"This ruling is historic in that it marks the first time that a court has deemed racist online trolling activity that can interfere with one’s equal access to a public accommodation. The Court’s ruling recognizes the real-world damage done when bigots take to the internet to target and threaten African Americans and other people of color,” said Kristen Clarke, President and Executive Director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. “This ruling should send a strong message to other white supremacists that they can and will be held accountable for hateful activity that constitutes unlawful discrimination, no matter whether it occurs online or in the real world.”

https://goodmenproject.com/featured-...arassment-wcz/

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/10/u...r-dumpson.html

I wonder who will hear this message?
Making threats has always been a crime, since they started making gun laws, to make it harder for you to eliminate the threat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:44 AM
 
5,784 posts, read 1,558,918 times
Reputation: 3570
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
While such sentiments are impolite and not acceptable, a legal ruling against the idiot is an infringement on the first amendment. In reading the article, it looks like the group threatened her with violence, which, of course, is illegal. It will be interesting to see what is parsed out on appeal as what constituted free speech and what was a true physical threat.


I am really surprised that the ACLU has not taken this case up on an appeal, as it will be interesting. Hate groups everywhere, like ANTIFA, BLM, SPLC, KKK, and neo Nazi groups should take notice of this ruling, as it will have precedence in future cases.


Despite language being objectionable, citizens should have the right to say whatever they want, as long as it is not causing damage to someone. Hurting their feelings should not be illegal. They really crossed the line with the threats, however.


There was a similar case tried locally in which a student dressed in a gorilla suit and offered bananas to BLM members who were protesting on campus. Ultimately, the defendant was found innocent, as he did not harm or threaten the BLM protesters. Certainly the guy was an idiot, but being stupid is not illegal.


One thing that I think is interesting is that the action taken by the group was against a college student (a kid). It similarly always shocks me when I attend a college football game and hear some of the terrible things said to the players on the bench (the seats are ten feet away from the player's bench in this stadium). They are kids, for Christ's sake, and adults are saying these things to them. When they pull off their helmets, there is just a kid looking back at you, not some inanimate monster in a uniform. Have some civility.
Exactly, X10!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 07:43 AM
 
19,579 posts, read 17,622,236 times
Reputation: 10700
As long as they charge someone who fakes a hate crime( Like Jussie Smollett did) with being a white supremacist and they get the same punishment as actual white supremacists, I'm okay with stiffer penalties.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 07:48 AM
 
17,478 posts, read 8,817,327 times
Reputation: 10060
I wonder if this would apply to “massacre Mitch” and threats associated, or the million other online threats and harassment
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 07:50 AM
 
16,012 posts, read 4,228,143 times
Reputation: 11388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icy Tea View Post
As long as they charge someone who fakes a hate crime( Like Jussie Smollett did) with being a white supremacist and they get the same punishment as actual white supremacists, I'm okay with stiffer penalties.
Why would acting be the same as actual threats meant seriously?

Obviously he should be punished for whatever crimes committed (and so should Trump, but he is protected....), but that's a whole different story.

The KKK was put mostly out of business by the law. The few who are ruining the inter web should be also. They are effectively pooping on Public Accommodations....to say nothing of terroristic threats.

As I remember it was Republicans who wrote and brought the Patriot Act and unlimited Security State to this nation. The idea was to follow people online, on the phone, etc. who were thinking about doing bad things.

That includes Nazis.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 07:52 AM
 
16,012 posts, read 4,228,143 times
Reputation: 11388
Quote:
Originally Posted by saltine View Post
I wonder if this would apply to “massacre Mitch” and threats associated, or the million other online threats and harassment
1. Public figures - pols - work with a different standard. Jefferson bought a newspaper just to pillory George Washington (Fox news is nothing new!)

2. Read...it's the CONSISTENT practice of trolling and threats that is being discussed, not some backhanded trending twitter feed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 08:06 AM
 
Location: Here.
14,034 posts, read 12,737,351 times
Reputation: 16464
It won’t do any good. These bums probably don’t have the money to pay. Would have been better to put them on a pillory in the inner city under a sign “I hate black people”. But the liberals say that would be cruel and unusual, so we can’t do it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 08:18 AM
 
Location: Texas
35,487 posts, read 19,481,382 times
Reputation: 21098
Lightbulb Landmark Decision Sends Strong Message To Supremacists

Yeah, well, so what?

tRump and his GOP bootlickers still support them 100%.

And they vote Pub 100%

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top