Cuomo signs bill banning sale of "hate symbols"

Occam's Banana

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 5, 2010
Messages
40,059
Cuomo signs bill banning sale of Confederate flags
https://nypost.com/2020/12/15/cuomo-signs-bill-banning-sale-of-confederate-flags/
Bernadette Hogan & Carl Campanile (15 December 2020)

ALBANY — Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed a bill into law aimed at banning the sale of “hate symbols” such as the Confederate Flag or the Swastika on state property — even while admitting the new edict might clash with the First Amendment and be struck down as unconstitutional.

The new law — effective immediately — prohibits the sale of hate symbols on public grounds including state and local fairs, and also severely limits their display unless deemed relevant to serving an educational or historical purpose.

But Cuomo said the rule likely needs “certain technical changes” so the Empire State doesn’t get caught treading upon free speech protections codified in the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.

“This country faces a pervasive, growing attitude of intolerance and hate — what I have referred to in the body politic as an American cancer,” Cuomo wrote in his approval message.

“By limiting the display and sale of the confederate flag, Nazi swastika and other symbols of hatred from being displayed or sold on state property, including the state fairgrounds, this will help safeguard New Yorkers from the fear-installing effects of these abhorrent symbols.”

He continued: “While I fully support the spirit of this legislation, certain technical changes are necessary to balance the State’s interests in preventing the use of hate symbols on state land with free speech protections embodied in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

[... FULL ARTICLE AT LINK: https://nypost.com/2020/12/15/cuomo-signs-bill-banning-sale-of-confederate-flags/ ...]
 
Is somebody actually selling swastikas on state property in the state of New York?
 
Probably not. But like anything else, this legislation just paves the way for even greater aggression toward free speech. Whoever said the slippery slope is a logical fallacy was either seriously misled or pure evil.
 
Probably not. But like anything else, this legislation just paves the way for even greater aggression toward free speech. Whoever said the slippery slope is a logical fallacy was either seriously misled or pure evil.
Yup, "it's just to prevent the swastikas" today, but will be used to prevent whatever thought crime you might want to pedal tommorow. We're already white supremacists in how we're presented. No stretch from current required.
 
I have a symbol for you.

stamp-act-cartoon-1765-granger.jpg


XNN
 
The limitation of this to state property is a pretty important detail.

States shouldn't own as much property as they do. I would argue that they shouldn't own any at all. Minarchists and constitutionalists would not permit them to own very much, but would allow for at least some.

If there is any legitimate ownership of property by states, then wouldn't a rule like this, limited to their property and inapplicable to other properties within the state limits, be fully within their purview as the property owners?
 
Will it still be considered a hate symbol if leftists are the ones using them?

Questions like this highlight how meaningless the categories of left and right are.

As I would normally think of what constitutes a leftist, the very fact that someone would even display a swastika with approval automatically means they must be a leftist, no less than if it were a hammer and sickle. Maybe less so with a confederate flag, but that's debatable.
 
The limitation of this to state property is a pretty important detail.

States shouldn't own as much property as they do. I would argue that they shouldn't own any at all. Minarchists and constitutionalists would not permit them to own very much, but would allow for at least some.

If there is any legitimate ownership of property by states, then wouldn't a rule like this, limited to their property and inapplicable to other properties within the state limits, be fully within their purview as the property owners?

Yeah, that's was I was thinking. It's a moronic law but since it's only public property is it really violating anyone's rights?
 
So he signs the bill essentially acknowledging it's unconstitutional, but whatever he determines the "state's interests" to be are more important than the Consitution? Might even be a new low for Cuomo.
 
Back
Top