From the sign code in Arab, Alabama, which regulates privately owned signs on private property:
While trying to maintain content-neutrality, signs that contain vulgar, threatening, hate speech, lewd or indecent content are not permitted.
I believe that should read “while not actually trying to maintain content-neutrality.” Indeed, a prohibition on “vulgar” signs is unconstitutionally content-based and vague; a prohibition on “lewd or indecent content” is unconstitutionally content-based and probably vague; a prohibition on “hate speech” is unconstitutionally viewpoint-based (and content-based) and vague. The prohibition on threatening speech, if it’s limited to speech that constitutes a “true threat” of illegal conduct, is also content-based but constitutionally permissible (since true threats are excluded from First Amendment protection).
The name of the city is pronounced “AY-rab,” if I’m hearing the recording at Arab City Hall correctly.
The post Arab “Hate Speech” appeared first on Reason.com.
