Would be an open-and-shut case if someone would push it that far. SCOTUS ruled unanimously (yes, even (((Ginsburg)))) in Matal v Tam that "hate speech" does not exist in the legal sense.
Would be an open-and-shut case if someone would push it that far. SCOTUS ruled unanimously (yes, even (((Ginsburg)))) in *Matal v Tam* that "hate speech" does not exist in the legal sense.
(post is archived)