[DarrellZero]

Minnesota, America’s D student with respect to the Constitution, is at it again.

Of course, the jury will find her guilty of speech “likely to cause violence.” Because she used THAT word.

And the SC will overturn it because, outside of very few exceptions, you can say anything you want to anyone you want in the USA, and thank God for that.

“Likely to cause violence” is not, and has never been, an exception to the First Amendmment. For very good reasons.

[Responsibility2nd]

Her using that word is indeed “Likely to cause violence”.

In that the little boy’s mama is likely to go all ape bleepy on the white woman.

[Labyrinthos]

“Likely to cause violence” is not, and has never been, an exception to the First Amendment.

Incorrect. The SCOTUS has repeatedly held that the 1st Amendment does not protect "fighting words" -- Words that are "likely to provoke the average person to retaliation, and thereby cause a breach of the peace." Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U. S. 568, 315 U. S. 574 (1942).