The American courts routinely rejected the violent heckler’s veto, saying that it is the obligation of the government to protect the speaker and punish the violent, not silence speech on fear of violence.
Silencing the speaker - or in this case, labeling and punishing the dissident - shows tolerance for the tactic and results in more of it, while providing justification for violence fascist tactics against those who still dare speak.
>The American courts routinely rejected the violent heckler’s veto, saying that it is the obligation of the government to protect the speaker and punish the violent, not silence speech on fear of violence.
No, they only protect the left from the heckler’s veto. People on the right receive no such protection.