Stay Curious. Stay Connected.
MailNewsletters♡Donate Now
Sign up
*Password must be at least 8 characters and contain one uppercase letter, one lowercase letter, one number and one symbol.
Already have an account?
By submitting, you consent that you are at least 18 years of age and to receive information about MPR's or APMG entities' programs and offerings. The personally identifying information you provide will not be sold, shared, or used for purposes other than to communicate with you about MPR, APMG entities, and its sponsors. You may opt-out at any time clicking the unsubscribe link at the bottom of any email communication. View our Privacy Policy.
Sign in to your profile
Forgot Password?
New to MPR News?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Reset Password

Enter the username on file and we'll send you a code to reset your password.

Still require assistance or not sure what your User Name is?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Email Verification

A verification code has been emailed to

Still awaiting the code?
Daily Circuit Blog
Eric Ringham

Where do you draw the line on hate speech?

Go Deeper.

Create an account or log in to save stories.

Log inCreate a free Account

Like this?

Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.

Show me!

Hate speech and First Amendment rights were a topic in the news before Wade Michael Page allegedly killed six people at a Sikh temple. Remember Mark Yudof, former president of the University of Minnesota? He's now in charge of the University of California, where a task force has recommended a ban on protests against Israel. Atlantic blogger Emily Richmond outlines Yudof's predicament:

In response to concerns about incidents of discrimination on the campuses in its system, a UC fact-finding team has issued a report recommending bans on hate speech and campus-backed protests against Israel as a means of curbing anti-Semitism .... Now several thousand members of the campus community are asking UC President Mark Yudof not to follow those recommendations because of the impact they could have on free speech, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

If you're rusty on the First Amendment (you really should know it by heart), here's the text:

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.

The Daily Circuit will be talking about the line between protected speech and hate speech at 10:20. Where do you think that line should be drawn?