Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

‘You should have died in the Holocaust’: Neo-Nazi harassment is not free speech, judge rules
WaPo ^ | 11-17-2018 | Deanna Paul

Posted on 11/17/2018 3:00:42 PM PST by NRx

One emailer wrote: ““You are a disgusting, vile Jew … This is OUR country: you’re merely living here (for now).”

A caller said: “You should have died in the Holocaust with the rest of your people.”

But the calls that most disturbed Tanya Gersh consisted only of the sound of gunshots being fired.

The terror campaign — known as a “troll storm” — was the result of Daily Stormer publisher Andrew Anglin’s December 2016 directive, urging hundreds of thousands of readers to harass the Jewish woman and her family, according to court filings.

Gersh sued the known neo-Nazi. On Wednesday, a Montana federal judge denied Anglin’s motion to dismiss the case, holding that speech in encouraging anti-Semitic harassment was not entitled to First Amendment protection.

The Montana mother found herself in Anglin’s crosshairs in late 2016, after Richard Spencer, a household name in the alt-right movement, gained notoriety when a video of him shouting “Hail Trump!” at a conference of nearly 300 white nationalists — and the Nazi salutes it elicited — went viral.

Spencer’s mother, Sherry Spencer, owned a ski home in the otherwise idyllic town of Whitefish, Mont. After facing local protests related to her son’s views, she reached out to Gersh, who in 2016 worked as a real estate agent, about selling the property.

Subsequently, court filings allege, Sherry Spencer decided not to sell. Months later, she published a blog post on Medium, accusing Gersh of extortion, threats and denouncing her son’s views.

The next day, Anglin called his own readers to action.

“Are y’all ready for an old fashioned Troll Storm?” Anglin wrote in a Dec. 16, 2016, post on the Daily Stormer website...

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; US: Montana
KEYWORDS: bammyjudge; blackrobedclown; clownbammyjudge; despotjudge; dncjudicialactivist; fedjudgepresident; freespeech; jailforjudges; juckthefudge; skidmarkjudge; thelawisinmymouth; theskidmarkjudge; unfitforthebench
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last
A rare case of a Federal Judge being sensible. No right is absolute and inciting people to terrorize someone is clearly beyond the pale.
1 posted on 11/17/2018 3:00:42 PM PST by NRx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NRx

terrorizing and threatening a person is not “free speech”


2 posted on 11/17/2018 3:02:27 PM PST by faithhopecharity ("Politicians aren't born, they're excreted." -Marcus Tillius Cicero (3 BCE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: faithhopecharity
I'm not a fan of doxxing, but this establishes a terrible, terrible precedent.

One of the reasons we're dealing with the wave of de-platforming on virtually every segment of the Internet-which has bled into meat space-is because no one stood up for Andrew Anglin's right to free speech, aside from Tucker Carlson, when he was under legal assault.

You can't preserve freedom of expression and freedom of association if you carve out exceptions for speech that you feel is vile or offensive.

3 posted on 11/17/2018 3:05:41 PM PST by OddLane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: faithhopecharity

Let us see the court hold the same for a trophy hunter who did nothing wrong.


4 posted on 11/17/2018 3:05:42 PM PST by marktwain (President Trump and his supporters are the Resistance. His opponents are the Reactionaries.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OddLane
You can't preserve freedom of expression and freedom of association if you carve out exceptions for speech that you feel is vile or offensive.

Exactly correct.

5 posted on 11/17/2018 3:06:24 PM PST by marktwain (President Trump and his supporters are the Resistance. His opponents are the Reactionaries.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Yep


6 posted on 11/17/2018 3:09:47 PM PST by jospehm20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NRx

You’re drinking Wapo’s koolaid.

The Daily Stormer’s crime consisted of putting a public person’s name on the site (she was leading the protests against zspencer’s mother while trying to force her into selling their business and donating the money to her select people) and inviting people to give her their opinion while specifically warning against sending threats.

The threat to us is that if we urge people to contact our senator’s and a judge rules we are extremists, we will be held liable because a far leftist decides to claim that she received threats as a result without evidence whatsoever.


7 posted on 11/17/2018 3:10:48 PM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain; OddLane

agreed


8 posted on 11/17/2018 3:11:21 PM PST by SaveFerris (Luke 17:28 ... as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold ......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NRx
"Congress shall make no law..." is a very absolute statement. That is not a debatable point.
9 posted on 11/17/2018 3:14:40 PM PST by sourcery (Non Aquiesco: "I do not consent" (Latin))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NRx

Ok. So we can shut down the Nation of Islam?

*****

” On Wednesday, a Montana federal judge denied Anglin’s motion to dismiss the case, holding that speech in encouraging anti-Semitic harassment was not entitled to First Amendment protection.”


10 posted on 11/17/2018 3:18:04 PM PST by 2banana (Were you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OddLane

Inciting violence, and threats is not free speech. The judge got it right. This in no interferes with Anglin’s right to express his political views, it only prevents him from trying to destroy someone’s life.


11 posted on 11/17/2018 3:20:16 PM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (Schumer delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: OddLane

Yup, Daily Stormer was the test case. After Charlottesville—where ANTIFA, who had no permits to be there, were deliberately pushed by police into the Unite the Right marchers for the clear purpose of creating violence—the order came down to push the Daily Stormer off the internet.

We looked the other way because they were “just a Nazi site.”

Today its Life site news, a mainstream conservative publication getting kicked off their registrar. Tomorrow they’ll be taking our ability to process payments on FR.


12 posted on 11/17/2018 3:20:46 PM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

Read your cases again kiddo. Can you commit an assault over the phone?

The only thing they can get you for is if you’re outside the house burning the cross and urging an imminent attack.


13 posted on 11/17/2018 3:24:44 PM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NRx

Spencer is rather heavily rumored to be controlled opposition, financed by the same guy who finances the Democrats.


14 posted on 11/17/2018 3:25:05 PM PST by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NRx

It has nothing to do with speech - Eric Swalwell just threatened and harassed a class of people - I don’t see judges or even the government demanding he step down, be blocked on the internet or be sued into oblivion.

Ergo - harassment as free speech is OK so long as you’re saying the right things?

That’s BS.

Don’t fall for the socialist brainwashing - what daily stormer did is what all socialists and antifa AND LGBTQ AND DEMOCRATS have been doing with impunity and legal approval for years. They just don’t want anybody opposing their ideas to do it.


15 posted on 11/17/2018 3:25:35 PM PST by Skywise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NRx

Unless it’s a clear threat of violence with the immediate means to carry it out its protected Free Speech.

There is no such thing as “hate speech.” That’s a liberal fiction.

Once you start agreeing to limit speech, anything “offensive” to a leftist will be banned.

Just like gun rights. Don’t give them an inch.


16 posted on 11/17/2018 3:26:05 PM PST by TigerClaws
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom of Speech Wins
Richard Spencer, a household name in the alt-right movement...

Yeah, it's funny how uninterested the mediots are in his background as an obama loving Occupy Wall Street 'tard. He's a total cutout, and and won't be surprised if he's got a direct line to Soros.

A Jewish nazi collaborator pretending not to be a nazi, funding a commie who is pretending to be a nazi. Strange times we live in.

17 posted on 11/17/2018 3:29:37 PM PST by Sirius Lee (In God We Trust, In Trump We MAGA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
” On Wednesday, a Montana federal judge denied Anglin’s motion to dismiss the case, holding that speech in encouraging anti-Semitic harassment was not entitled to First Amendment protection.”

Does the same judgement apply to democrats, celebrities, media and so-called educators calling for harassment and violence toward conservatives and republicans? That was a rhetorical questions to which we all know the answer.

18 posted on 11/17/2018 3:30:00 PM PST by JesusIsLord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Skywise

This is exactly correct. Doxxing is a regular practice by leftists and they do it with impunity. Doxxing and deplatforming are the pincers that have been crippling all dissent.

This is not a good verdict.


19 posted on 11/17/2018 3:31:55 PM PST by Shadow44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NRx

‘Free speech’ was intended to allow unfettered criticism of the government, right up to the point of advocating violence. Many other kinds of speech may be and are prohibited. The idea that the original intent of the Founders was that pornography or ‘fighting words’ were covered by ‘freedom of speech’ is beyond ignorant.


20 posted on 11/17/2018 3:32:47 PM PST by jjotto (Next week, BOOM!, for sure!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson