ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Constitutional Law Blogs -> First Amendment Center

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Constitutional Law

: First Amendment Center

Congresswoman again introduces bill to outlaw nooses

By By David L. Hudson Jr.
First Amendment scholar

ADVERTISEMENTS

Comment? E-mail me

For the fourth straight year, a congresswoman from Texas has introduced a bill that would criminalize the display of nooses with the intent to intimidate or harass others.

Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee introduced the Noose Hate Crime Act of 2011, H.R. 221, which provides: ?Whoever, with intent to harass or intimidate any person because of that person's race, color, religion, or national origin, displays a noose in public shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.?

Jackson Lee has introduced this bill each year since 2008, after a noose was displayed in response to the Jena Six controversy in Louisiana.

In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the bulk of a Virginia cross-burning statute in Virginia v. Black. The Court ruled that displaying a cross with the ?intent to intimidate? meant that the law targeted only those displays of crosses that constituted true threats.

Jackson?s measure on nooses also contains the key ?intent to intimidate? language.

Several states have anti-noose statutes.

  • California prohibits the hanging of a noose on public or private property with the intent to terrorize others.
  • In Louisiana and Virginia, it is a crime to display a noose on private or public property or on a public highway with the intent to intimidate.
  • New York provides that display a noose on public or private property of another constitutes ?aggravated harassment.?
  • The District of Columbia criminalizes the display of certain emblems ? and specifically mentions the noose and Nazi swastika ? where done to ?injure, intimidate or interfere with others? civil rights.

Supporters of such state laws and Jackson?s federal legislation argue that the measures target unprotected true threats, not protected speech. True threats are a recognized exception to the First Amendment.

Comment? E-mail me

Full post as published by First Amendment Center on January 27, 2011 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0126 secs (new cache)