There is a First Amendment question before America right now, according to legal expert Alan Dershowitz on Newsmax, and that is drawing the line between advocacy and incitement with protests.
Dershowitz denounced "disgusting" and "outrageous" protests that threaten Supreme Court justices over their potential rulings against the progressive agenda, which are "immoral and wrong."
"The question is it illegal under the First Amendment – does it cross the line from advocacy, which is constitutionally protected, to incitement?" Dershowitz told Saturday's "America Right Now." "I have to tell you, if it does, then Chuck Schumer is in trouble, too, because you know, he made a speech in front of the Supreme Court in which he basically targeted two justices of the Supreme Court and said, 'You won't even know what hit you.'
"Now, he didn't intend for that to be an incitement, but certainly mentally disturbed people and others, like the kid who was found in front of [conservative Justice Brett] Kavanaugh's house could easily take that as a dog whistle."
Democrats might have exposed themselves by using former President Donald Trump's "peacefully and patriotically" protest at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, in attempt to tie it to incitement, while Schumer directly called for attacks on conservatives, according to Dershowitz.
"It's so interesting, because the Democrats are saying that Trump engaged in the dog whistle when he said, 'peacefully and patriotically let your voices be heard,' but Schumer did not," Dershowitz told host Tom Basile. "And the other side, the exact opposite.
"So we have to have one rule for all people, regardless of party, race, gender, or ideology."
Dershowitz noted, while there is already a U.S. law that prohibits "pickets and parades" at the homes of judges, witnesses, or jurors in an attempt to intimidate for a desired result, there are limits on constitutionally protected speech by the First Amendment on "place, time, and manner."
"Well, a law would be constitutional if it required a certain number of yards and maybe fences to protect the justice's home – that would be constitutional," Dershowitz said. "You could stop people from getting right up to the home. Place, time, and manner restrictions on free speech are permissible.
"For example, a person can start shouting at 2 o'clock in the morning, or going around with a loudspeaker. So there are permissible restrictions as long – as they're content neutral and don't depend on who the party is."
Dershowitz lamented the leftist advocacy to the potential point of incitement has become too accepted in America, and not held in account like it is for the political right.
"Now, in the United States, there's no such thing as content neutral," Dershowitz concluded. "We have different rules for Black Lives Matter. We have different rules for people who engage in advocacy or violence on the left than we do for the right – and that's absolutely unconstitutional."
About NEWSMAX TV:
NEWSMAX is the fastest-growing cable news channel in America!
Eric Mack has been a writer and editor at Newsmax since 2016. He is a 1998 Syracuse University journalism graduate and a New York Press Association award-winning writer.
© 2023 Newsmax. All rights reserved.