Listing 1 - 10 of 14 | << page >> |
Sort by
|
Choose an application
Droit--Sociologie --- Gerechtelijke sociologie --- Law--Sociology --- Recht--Sociologie --- Rechtssociologie --- Sociological jurisprudence --- Sociologie du droit --- Sociologie juridique --- Sociologie van het recht --- Sociology of law --- Law reform --- Radicalism --- Social movements --- Droit --- Radicalisme --- Mouvements sociaux --- Social aspects --- Réforme --- Aspect social --- Réforme --- United States --- Social movements - United States --- Law reform - Social aspects - United States --- Radicalism - United States
Choose an application
Freedom of speech --- Hate speech --- Pornography --- Law and legislation --- United States
Choose an application
The professional discontent of lawyers in contemporary society is introduced via an account of the long friendship of Ezra Pound and Archibald MacLeish; then the authors suggest how critical legal theory might advance both legal thinking and the impoveris
Practice of law --- Lawyers --- Psychological aspects. --- Job satisfaction --- Advocates --- Attorneys --- Bar --- Barristers --- Jurists --- Legal profession --- Solicitors --- Legal status, laws, etc. --- Representation in administrative proceedings --- Persons
Choose an application
A controversial argument for reconsidering the limits of free speech Swirling in the midst of the resurgence of neo-Nazi demonstrations, hate speech, and acts of domestic terrorism are uncomfortable questions about the limits of free speech. The United States stands apart from many other countries in that citizens have the power to say virtually anything without legal repercussions. But, in the case of white supremacy, does the First Amendment demand that we defend Nazis? In Must We Defend Nazis?, legal experts Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic argue that it should not. Updated to consider the white supremacy demonstrations and counter-protests in Charlottesville and debates about hate speech on campus and on the internet, the book offers a concise argument against total, unchecked freedom of speech. Delgado and Stefancic instead call for a system of free speech that takes into account the harms that hate speech can inflict upon disempowered, marginalized people. They examine the prevailing arguments against regulating speech, and show that they all have answers. They also show how limiting free speech would work in a legal framework and offer suggestions for activist lawyers and judges interested in approaching the hate speech controversy intelligently. As citizens are confronting free speech in contention with equal dignity, access, and respect, Must We Defend Nazis? puts aside clichés that clutter First Amendment thinking, and presents a nuanced position that recognizes the needs of our increasingly diverse society.A controversial argument for reconsidering the limits of free speech Swirling in the midst of the resurgence of neo-Nazi demonstrations, hate speech, and acts of domestic terrorism are uncomfortable questions about the limits of free speech. The United States stands apart from many other countries in that citizens have the power to say virtually anything without legal repercussions. But, in the case of white supremacy, does the First Amendment demand that we defend Nazis? In Must We Defend Nazis?, legal experts Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic argue that it should not. Updated to consider the white supremacy demonstrations and counter-protests in Charlottesville and debates about hate speech on campus and on the internet, the book offers a concise argument against total, unchecked freedom of speech. Delgado and Stefancic instead call for a system of free speech that takes into account the harms that hate speech can inflict upon disempowered, marginalized people. They examine the prevailing arguments against regulating speech, and show that they all have answers. They also show how limiting free speech would work in a legal framework and offer suggestions for activist lawyers and judges interested in approaching the hate speech controversy intelligently. As citizens are confronting free speech in contention with equal dignity, access, and respect, Must We Defend Nazis? puts aside clichés that clutter First Amendment thinking, and presents a nuanced position that recognizes the needs of our increasingly diverse society.
White supremacy movements. --- Nazis. --- Freedom of speech --- Hate speech --- Defamation against groups --- Group defamation --- Group libel --- Racist speech --- Speech, Hate --- Libel and slander --- National socialists --- Fascists --- Socialists --- National socialism --- Neo-Nazis --- Supremacist movements, White --- Supremacy movements, White --- White supremacist movements --- Social movements --- White nationalism --- Skinheads --- Law and legislation --- United States.
Choose an application
Sociology of culture --- Sociology of minorities --- United States of America
Choose an application
Choose an application
Choose an application
Choose an application
The author's have created a reader for the twenty-first century, one that shakes up the legal academy, questions comfortable liberal premises, and leads the search for new ways of thinking about our nation's most intractable, and insoluble, problem: race.
Race discrimination --- Critical legal studies --- Racism in language --- Law and legislation --- United States --- Race relations --- Philosophy.
Choose an application
Listing 1 - 10 of 14 | << page >> |
Sort by
|