by Nomad
A Boca Raton man flies the flags of the Confederacy and the KKK over his home. A recruitment sign along with a noose are also features in his front yard. Is this really free speech, protected by the Constitution or symbols meant to intimidate black Americans and other minorities?
Does freedom of speech
include the freedom to demonstrate open support for a racist hate group? According
to one west Boca Raton Florida man, it certainly does. "Mr. Hayes" - the only name he would
give- hoisted both the KKK and confederate flag over
his mobile home a couple weeks ago. He has also posted a sign recruiting new
members.
Hayes told the
reporter that he had moved to Florida from New York about four years ago. Although the KKK has always had a violent history
against blacks and other minorities, Hayes says he doesn't condone such acts.
Nevertheless, he does think his right to free speech allows him to hang a noose
in his front yard.
Since the 1970s the Klan has been greatly weakened by internal conflicts, court cases, a seemingly endless series of splits and government infiltration. While some factions have preserved an openly racist and militant approach, others have tried to enter the mainstream, cloaking their racism as mere "civil rights for whites." Today, the Center estimates that there are between 5,000 and 8,000 Klan members, split among dozens of different - and often warring - organizations that use the Klan name.
In fact, the KKK is considered only one of the 939 active
hate groups that the SPLC has tracked. The organization categorized these
groups into eight groups: black separatist, neo-confederate, Christian
identity, racist skinhead, white nationalist, neo-Nazi, Ku Klux Klan and
general hate.
A vast majority of the groups are located in the South- a total of 589 identified groups. Texas has 57 and Florida hosts 58 groups but surprisingly, perhaps the state with the most groups is California. Unlike the South, California does not have a history as a former slave holding state or a member of the Confederacy.
A vast majority of the groups are located in the South- a total of 589 identified groups. Texas has 57 and Florida hosts 58 groups but surprisingly, perhaps the state with the most groups is California. Unlike the South, California does not have a history as a former slave holding state or a member of the Confederacy.
Like a lot of white supremists, Mr Hayes seemed concerned
about the race demographics. He told an interviewer:
"As many people know, the white families are producing less children because the father and mother work and you have interracial marriages and gay marriages, so there are less and less white children being born every day. So we're against that."
As far as violence, Mr. Hayes said,
"We don't go around committing hate crimes .We don't beat up on faggots or black people or burn crosses or any of that nonsense."
Despite those assurances, some of his neighbors don't like
the idea. Others, Hayes claimed, seem to support his idea of free speech.
Hayes said he understands how people might feel threatened, but he doesn't seem to mind."Hey, nobody stops the Puerto Ricans from flying their Puerto Rican flag or the Jews from having their yarmulke or whatever it is in the holidays," Hayes said. "I mean, everybody is entitled to do what they want to do. That's what this country is all about -- freedom of speech."
According to Hayes, flying a state (or US territorial) flag is the same as a Confederate flag. And wearing a religious skullcap by Jews is the same as flying a KKK flag. At least when it comes to free speech.
In a famous Supreme
Court case from 1949, Justice William O. Douglas wrote that freedom of speech was protected against
censorship or punishment, "unless
shown likely to roduce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil
that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest ... There
is no room under our Constitution for a more restrictive view."
More recently, in Virginia v.
Black (2003), a case involving cross burning- a KKK tradition- the U.S.
Supreme Court ruled that that while cross-burning may constitute illegal
intimidation in some cases, a ban on the public burning of crosses would
violate the First Amendment. Justice
Sandra Day O'Connor
"State may choose to
prohibit only those forms of intimidation," Justice O'Connor wrote,
"that are most likely to inspire fear of bodily harm."
So while the flags themselves might be offensive, in themselves, according to the Supreme Court, they are considered protected free speech. The noose? That's another story.
