I don't know that they have a decision but it is hate speech never the less and if you do it and get the crap beat out of you no one will charge the ones doing the beating.
As far as the Flag burning decision it stinks, so we will never agree on that. He could just as easily seen it as incitement to riot and ended it.
So you are admitting that Scalia had nothing to do with making the Confederate flag a symbol of hate. I will concede that the Confederate flag appears to not be afforded the same constitutional protections as is flag burning, and that needs to be tried in the court system as unconstitutional due to freedom of speech as afforded in the constitution.
That case needs to be pushed. If they refuse to accept that it affords the same constitutional rights under freedom of speech as is granted to flag burning, then we need to readdress the flag burning issue again.
The courts must be consistent. If a flag and what you do with it is a right protected by free speech (as long as it is your flag - and that was a key part of the ruling I might add - which means legally they could require the person burning it to prove that it is their flag and if they cannot then they can be arrested on the spot), then so is your personal Confederate flag.
If someone assaults you because of your Confederate flag and law enforcement refuses to arrest the person or people involved, and they are know, then you sue the law enforcement agency that refuses to act. Because assault is a separate issue from freedom of speech.