Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 05/11/2025 8:07:00 AM PDT by RandFan
On Wednesday, the same day Palestinian Columbia University student Mohsen Mahdawi was released on bail pending a Habeas hearing after a judge determined that he did not pose a risk to the public, Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky blasted the Congress for pushing new speech restrictions, particularly antisemitism measures that would restrict criticism of Israel on school campuses.
“We’re either a free society governed by the Constitution, or we’re not. We need to challenge hate with reason, not censorship.”
Paul was specifically addressing the Antisemitism Awareness Act which would codify a Trump-era executive order declaring that antisemitism is a prohibited form of discrimination in schools and universities, and would use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism in assessing cases of antisemitic discrimination through the Department of Education.
Critics say that it would allow the government to conflate criticism of Zionism and the Israeli government with antisemitism and serve as a dangerous tool to shut down free speech. Paul wondered aloud if campus police would be used in enforcing new speech rules, and how.
As The Jewish Chronicle reported after the vote was postponed, Sen. Paul was part of “a testy hearing on Wednesday that covered objections to the bill ranging from whether a Christian would be barred from saying that Jews killed Jesus, to the acceptability of making contemporary political allusions to Nazi Germany and even the comedy of Jerry Seinfeld and Joan Rivers.”
Paul cited the landmark 1969 Brandenburg v. Ohio case, in which Ku Klux Klan member Clarence Brandenburg was convicted under two Ohio laws of allegedly inciting violence against Jews and African-Americans with his speech.
Brandenburg claimed that his punishment violated the First Amendment. The Supreme Court agreed with him.
(Excerpt) Read more at responsiblestatecraft.org ...
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Clearly unconstitutional.
What will happen with it?
I don’t recall seeing much discussion about it here but maybe I missed it
I don’t know, but keep pounding away against continued unconstitutional acts and agencies of the federal gov’t. Someone may be listening.
I believe in freedom of SPEECH which does NOT include stopping Jewish students going to classes or any of the usual ‘hate actions’ liberals love to inflict on others.
I haven’t heard much about what’s actually in the bill but anything about “hate speech” automatically seems a bit dodgy and unconstitutional.
Although I believe antisemitism speeches and rants are usually the words from muslim supported groups associated with terrorists who indoctrinate college students who don’t have a clue about anything that matters and probably didn’t learn much in high school. But to censor speech against one group is overkill imho. I don’t always agree with the Senator, but on this issue I do.
I agree. It seems anything negative about a Jewish person or community is considered anti-Semitic. Look at what has been done with the n-word.
Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will not ever hurt me. Appears there are a lot of mush brains out there!!
Speech that leads to disruptive violence and denial of every citizens constitutional rights is not protected by the first amendment. Right now hate speech rules have been directed at right wing fascism that seeks to defend US citizens and their rights under the constitution.
“ We’re either a free society governed by the Constitution, or we’re not. We need to challenge hate with reason, not censorship.””
So me and a group of 6,000 friends can show up to counter protest to demonstrate our fight to free speech? Sure, let’s do it!
Yes, he has a point. A good point.
1) I have no problem with it. Most Jooz are marxist collectivists.
2) We already have self censorship. Try using the N word anywhere.
Of course he does. The Bill on its face is unconstitutional.
If it's the latter, I say just remove govt funding for college...period.
No. Rand has a problem with Jews, just like his nutter daddy.
It’s unconstitutional to not give Harvard taxpayer money when it makes it unsafe for Jewish students to go to class?
You could be an Obama judge.
After Covid and the vaxx and J6 I don’t trust anybody to defend our liberties without double standards.
They all ran and hid under pressure—and now they want to become heros.
Lol.
That would be an issue for the state and the people of that state.
Where does the Constitution give the feds authority over individual speech or action?
You could be a leading Leftist in favor of unconstitutional abridgement of God-given individual rights and freedoms.
“...We need to challenge hate with reason, not censorship.” Oh yeah. That really worked with Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Franco, Mao, Bin Laden...
I know the hack to how to control the entire populace. Don’t control people who are rioting because of what someone else said. Then make a law against speech. Another group wants protection. Say it is naggers first, then fags, then Jews, lets move onto Muslims, Hispanics, then Catholics, that means WASP are the social sinners, and NOBODY PROTECTS THE MAJORITY.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.