Political Gabfest on Supreme Court decisions which protect the First Amendment.

Should Offensive Speech Be Protected?

Should Offensive Speech Be Protected?

Slate Plus
Your all-access pass
June 23 2017 3:48 PM
Comments

Free Speech for All?

The Political Gabfest on two First Amendment rulings by the Supreme Court.

Photo illustration by Natalie Matthews-Ramo. Photo by Jerome Miron-USA TODAY Sports. Logo by Washington Redskins.

Photo illustration by Natalie Matthews-Ramo. Photo by Jerome Miron-USA TODAY Sports. Logo by Washington Redskins.

In the Slate Plus bonus segment of Thursday’s edition of the Political Gabfest, First Amendment fans Emily, John, and Julia discuss two Supreme Court decisions: one striking down the disparagement clause in federal trademark law, and the other striking down a state law keeping sex offenders off social media.

Should any kind of speech—even that which is disparaging or offensive—be allowed to be trademarked? Does granting a trademark indicate an endorsement of such language? And does this mean that Washington’s NFL team gets to keep its controversial name?

The hosts also discuss whether banning registered sex offenders from social media goes too far.

Join Slate Plus to Listen to This Podcast

Sign up for Slate Plus to hear this podcast extra, and to get ad-free, extended versions of your favorite Slate podcasts. Membership starts at just $5 a month. Sign up today and try Slate Plus free for two weeks.

Your Slate Plus podcast feed

Copy this link and add it to your podcast app:

For full instructions see the Slate Plus podcasts FAQ.