Muzzling hate mongers

    0
    187

    Editor’s note: This letter is a response to an article in the Glendale news Press, April 5, entitled, “Harsh Words Draw Fire.” The letter writer is a dual resident of Malibu and Glendale, and is also a law student at Pepperdine University School of Law.

    The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects free speech. However, this protection can be limited when speech incites hate crimes. On April 2, during a Glendale City Council meeting, Iva Carrico engaged in a hate speech targeting Armenians in Glendale. Although Ms. Carrico’s bigoted remarks during the meeting did not rise to the level of incitement that generally demands criminal punishment under our legal system, civil liability should be imposed upon her if a victim of a hate crime can show a direct and causal link between Ms. Carrico’s verbal attack, and an incident of hate crime.

    Ms. Carrico categorized Armenians who live in Glendale as “evildoers” who are “intent on destroying Glendale.” Referring to the Armenian genocide, Ms. Carrico asked, “What were they doing so badly that they had to be killed off? If they acted in such a way as they have been doing now in Glendale, you can surmise why.” Because Ms. Carrico used the word “had” in the phrase “had to be killed off,” a logical inference which follows from her remarks is that Armenians in Glendale should be killed off for what they are doing in Glendale today. This sort of mindless rhetoric will impact the future of Armenians in Glendale. If this future happens to include hate crimes, then Ms. Carrico should be held liable for damages stemming from her speech.

    If someone who is defamed can sue to recover damages caused by speech, should not victims of hate crimes be able to sue for the same speech. Even though defamation involves speech, liability from defamation centers around the damages caused by the speech. The culpability for hate speech should also be measured by the damages it causes. Speech may be protected in America, but its adverse consequences may not be. Ultimately, Ms. Carrico and others who cannot control themselves from recklessly engaging in hate speech should either wear a muzzle in public or hire a good lawyer to defend themselves in court.

    Edwin Aiwazian