(TheLibertyRevolution.com)- Texas Democrat Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee last week introduced a bill aimed at fighting “white supremacy” that includes criminal charges for certain “hate speech.”
Jackson Lee’s “Leading Against White Supremacy Act of 2023” aims “to prevent and prosecute white supremacy-inspired hate crime and conspiracy to commit white supremacy-inspired hate crime.”
Adding “conspiracy to commit” to the bill means those who use supposed “hate speech” online could face criminal charges under the measure even if they don’t act on their threats, including someone who publishes “material advancing white supremacy, white supremacist ideology, antagonism based on ‘replacement theory,’ or hate speech that vilifies or is otherwise directed against any non-white person or group.”
In other words, Jackson Lee wants Congress to establish a law prohibiting the Free Speech of American citizens.
The legislation specifically lists social media platforms as one area in which publishing so-called “hate speech” could result in criminal charges if that hate speech motivates someone else to go out and commit a racist crime.
In her legislation, Jackson Lee claims that there has been an increase in mass shootings and “other hate crimes” that were “motivated by white supremacy.” She claims that these crimes were “inspired by conspiracy theories, blatant bigotry and mythical falsehoods such as ‘replacement theory.’” According to Jackson Lee, “severe criminal penalties must be applied to their perpetrators.”
In a column last week, constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley blasted Jackson Lee’s “anti-free speech” bill calling it “menacing.”
Turley argues that the legislation would “gut the First Amendment and create effective thought crimes.” He explains that the legislation is “so flagrantly constitutional on so many levels from free speech to vagueness that it is actually impressive.”
And while he concedes that Jackson Lee’s bill won’t see the light of day in the Republican-controlled House, Turley warns that the “anti-free speech elements” in the legislation should be “disturbing” because “they reflect successful efforts at speech criminalization in other countries.”