Recently, you may have heard that a student at Fairfield Warde High School has been arrested for making racially charged comments (1). Let us discuss this matter forthwith (see Note 1) .
Now, please don't get me wrong; I regard the specific remark that was made (a word beginning with N, and rhyming with "bigger") as vile, and inherently racist. It approaches the line between free speech and "hate speech". Nevertheless, that line was not crossed.
You see, just because someone utters an insult (or even a remark that is racist in nature), that doesn't necessarily mean that the speaker has engaged in criminal activity. For this to be the case, the words said must either constitute a "true threat" (to the safety of others), or cause/encourage physical harm to be done to another (2).
Perhaps I'm wrong, but it seems that in this instance, neither of the two associated tests can be met. Thus, the speech in question is not "hate speech", but free speech.
Having discussed the issue surrounding what words were said, let's move on to a secondary issue at play.
As the US Constitution's Supremacy Clause points out, in cases of conflicts between laws, the Constitution is the superior document (see Note 2) (3). Consider Title 53 Chapter 939 Section 53-37 of the Connecticut General Statutes. It specifies that:
"Any person who, by his advertisement, ridicules or holds up to contempt any person or class of persons, on account of the creed, religion, color, denomination, nationality or race of such person or class of persons, shall be guilty of a class D misdemeanor" (4).
And what does the Connecticut Constitution say about speech? Specifically, it says this:
"Every citizen may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty" (5).
Being that the General Statutes are subordinate to the state constitution, Section 53-37 is effectively unconstitutional, thus null and void. The Fairfield Police Department doesn't seem to realize or understand this.
In any event, since the remarks made were not of a criminal nature, this case is a big "oh well".
As it would have been to refrain from speaking, it was the prerogative of the student in question to make the comments that he allegedly did. In this, he did nothing that (constitutionally speaking) is criminally wrong. Therefore, the case should be dismissed, and the student released from police custody.
Finally, allow me to offer a bit of advice to town law enforcement. Don't waste the time and money of Fairfielders by going on "fishing expeditions". Instead, be a little more concerned with actual crimes, such as robberies and auto break-ins. Perhaps then, the town of Fairfield would be a safer place in which to live and work.
Note 1: "Forthwith", adverb. "Without any delay; immediately" (6)
Note 2: The Connecticut Constitution does not specifically address supremacy of laws. However, Article 11 Section 1 requires officers to "solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that (they) will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Connecticut, so long as (they) continue (to be) a citizen thereof".
Note 3: If found guilty of the charges against him ("ridicule" and "breach of the peace in the second degree"), the unnamed student could get up to seven months in jail. In addition, he could be required to pay a fine up to one thousand dollars (7).
Sources:
1. Bybee-Schler, Anna. "Warde Student Charged After Racist Snapchat Post: Fairfield PD". Fairfield, CT Patch, 2021, https://patch.com/connecticut/fairfield/warde-student-charged-after-racist-snapchat-post-fairfield-pd. Accessed 19 May 2021.
2. Personal knowledge.
3. Mount, Steve. "U.S. Constitution - Article 6 - The U.S. Constitution Online - Usconstitution.Net". Usconstitution.Net, https://usconstitution.net/xconst_A6.html. Accessed 19 May 2021.
4. "General Statutes of Connecticut, Chapter 939 - Offenses Against The Person". Cga.Ct.Gov, https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_939.htm#sec_53-37. Accessed 19 May 2021.
5. "Declaration Of Rights, Constitution Of The State Of Connecticut". Cga.Ct.Gov, 1965, https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/Content/constitutions/CTConstitution.htm. Accessed 19 May 2021.
6. "Definition Of FORTHWITH". Merriam-Webster.Com, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/forthwith. Accessed 19 May 2021.
7. "An Overview Of Misdemeanor Classes In Connecticut". Rudolphdefense.Com, 2020, https://www.rudolphdefense.com/an-overview-of-misdemeanor-classes-in-connecticut/. Accessed 19 May 2021.
Just a brief addendum. The Fairfield Police still refuses to give me any information regarding the particular charges brought against the student, and what specifically was said. It seems that according to CT General Statutes Chapter 14 Section 1-201, they don't have to; that portion of state law says that police forces ARE NOT "public agen(cies)". Thus, according to law, the Fairfield PD is not subject to state Freedom of Information laws. Unbelievable...
ReplyDelete