Recently, after the speech of Vice President J.D. Vance in Munich, various European leaders went public to express their shock and disbelief that they would be accused of rolling back on free speech. For many of us, it was a laughable display of denial, particularly from UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In a country that has eviscerated free speech, Starmer told Bret Baier that the UK “guards” free speech and “we don’t believe in censoring speech.” Now, the government is continuing this month with its effort to regulate and criminalize speech. The effort to crack down on “Islamophobia” could create a type of blasphemy standard if it encompasses criticism of the faith or its practices.
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner has announced that the government will be further cracking down on hate speech with a new working group tasked with defining ‘Islamophobia’. The free speech community is raising the alarm that the effort is likely to further broaden the government controls over speech.
It was announced last week that Rayner’s working group would be chaired by former Conservative attorney general Dominic Grieve KC, who has himself admitted that defining Islamophobia while safeguarding free speech is ‘extremely difficult.’ Notably, Grieve wrote the foreword to the 2018 All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) report on Islamophobia, which advanced a definition that many critics argue is far too broad.
The APPG included criticism of Islamic beliefs and practices as examples of Islamophobia. It has been condemned for treating criticism of the faith as a type of hate speech.
For years, I have been writing about the decline of free speech in the United Kingdom and the steady stream of arrests, including in my book, The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.
A man was convicted for sending a tweet while drunk referring to dead soldiers. Another was arrested for an anti-police t-shirt. Another was arrested for calling the Irish boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend a “leprechaun.” Yet another was arrested for singing “Kung Fu Fighting.” A teenager was arrested for protesting outside of a Scientology center with a sign calling the religion a “cult.”Last year, Nicholas Brock, 52, was convicted of a thought crime in Maidenhead, Berkshire. The neo-Nazi was given a four-year sentence for what the court called his “toxic ideology” based on the contents of the home he shared with his mother in Maidenhead, Berkshire. Judge Peter Lodder QC dismissed free speech or free thought concerns with a truly Orwellian statement: “I do not sentence you for your political views, but the extremity of those views informs the assessment of dangerousness.”
Lodder lambasted Brock for holding Nazi and other hateful values:
“[i]t is clear that you are a right-wing extremist, your enthusiasm for this repulsive and toxic ideology is demonstrated by the graphic and racist iconography which you have studied and appeared to share with others…”
The fear is that an expanded hate speech law that includes criticism of Islamophobia will operate like a British blasphemy law. In 2008, the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel were abolished in England. This new effort could constructively restore such prosecutions as they relate to Islam.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.
It’s astonishing how without our Constitution Western Europe has slid right back into the worst aspects of its history. Our founders really were brilliant, America still stands uniquely in the world. Thank you for this, Professor Turley.
How the Leftists here must envy the British government. Able to do all manner of preposterous tyrannical things without having to factor anything like the 2nd Amendment into the mix.
Thank God the Founding Fathers came up with the First Amendment.
OMFK
and the Second to try to keep the first if necessary.
I have ALWAYS questioned the constitutionality of that dem-inspired slate of “hate speech” legislation. It seems to me it is the top of a slippery slope to where Britain now finds itself sliding into despotism. Just as roevwade was mistakenly decided by activist judges. I do wish that hate speech legislation is soon challenged by our SCOTUS. If we don’t, we risk the same descent for our 1st amendment freedoms.
What hate speech legislation. There is no such legislation anywhere in the USA. It doesn’t exist. Because there is no doubt that it would indeed be unconstitutional. You find Dems advocating such legislation, which is of course their right! But you will not find them enacting it anywhere, because they can’t.
Hate speech exists, but only where there is a criminal component. We see it in federal and state legislation. It is limited by the First Amendment.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the UK issues an arrest warrant for Vice President Vance for his Munich speech. I mean, if “Kung Fu Fighting” qualifies as hate speech, Vance’s Munich speech should be a shoo-in. Thank you, Jonathan, for an excellent article. Please keep them coming. Greg
Professor Turley,
Where is the outrage at Trump’s “illegal protests” post? You focus on the crackdown on free speech in the UK while ignoring Trump’s efforts to do the same thing on our doorstep.
https://www.thefire.org/news/statement-president-trumps-truth-social-post-threatening-funding-cuts-illegal-protests
Property damage, harassment, and violence. You don’t get taxpayer dollars. You see that as equivalent to being arrested and put in jail for a silent prayer or for insulting a politician online?
To the best of my recollection, only one group of protesters was relentlessly pursued, prosecuted, and imprisoned by the government. And it wasn’t antisemitic college students.
A social media post is not law, it is an opinion. I read Trump’s EO on antisemitism. It looks like it simply references existing law as it applies to antisemitism. So harassment and discrimination are illegal, not a shock.
Protests that involve harassment, vandalism, and direct intimidation are illegal. Sorry Hamas sympathizers, nothing new there.
While I am not a big fan of Israel because of its political influence in the US, I have to admit that when I see all of those Arafat scarves in the protests, I have no sympathy for Hamas, or Hezbollah or any of the other myriad crazies. As brutal as it is, Israel has little choice in its response to Hamas.
Ironically, in 1492, the year that Columbus discovered the New World, Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand II of Spain accepted the surrender of Granada from the Moors, Islamic peoples from North Africa that had conquered and occupied the Iberian Peninsula since the Eighth Century. It has taken five centuries but they are back in Europe and now control some aspects of politics and civil administration, the latter being modestly comfortable with the blasphemy provisions of Sharia Law, which, depending upon the country and the severity of the religious insult, may range from fines and imprisonment to flogging, hanging, and beheading.
There are well over 50 million Muslims living in Europe at present. In London, the official figure is 15 percent of the population, but the unofficial figure is higher. By comparison, New York City’s Muslim population is about 9 percent. As the percentage of groups with specific customs and beliefs increases, the adoption of those customs and beliefs in some way becomes acceptable to the larger population that seeks harmony.
Not to be ignored in this analysis is the threat of violence one risks by blaspheming Islam or any of its instruments and beliefs. It is common for devout believers in Islam to take the law – written or unwritten – into their own hands to protect what they believe. Europe, in particular, has witnessed the carnage from blasphemous writings and depictions of Islam. Fear has driven the UK from its historic commitment to freedom of expression. Its politicians may soapbox all sorts of sophisticated excuses but in the final analysis, fear and nothing else has motivated the restrictions we see and Professor Turley describes. By generalizing the concept to include all sorts of blasphemous language or depictions, the state assuages its inability to address the problem.
The first step in solving any problem is admitting that there is a problem. The second step must be thoroughly disaggregating the elements of the problem to see what its cause might be and how to mitigate or eliminate it. The worst way to address a problem is to deny it exists and then go on believing and saying that critics are wrong. This appears to be where our UK friends are right now.
Thank you, Dr. Turley. Keep it going. Don’t let up.
I guess this men’s that the Islamic version of “Dogma” starring Jay and Silent Bob as well as as Ben Affleck and Matt Damon will not be premiering in the UK anytime soon. That is so sad. The discussion of church dogma and then gunshots on the bus was a true landmark in American Cinema. Also the unveiling of “Buddy Christ” was timeless.
But then again the UK did have bloody wars over the Prayer Books. And they did execute a king and then, in less than a generation, they brought his line back to rule them.
So what can you say other than “Mad Dogs and Englishman”.
Forgive my Scottish, Irish and French ancestors speaking out today. My English ancestors have stayed strangely quiet this morning.
Turley feels this issue deserves an article, and I agree. But then, why did he ignore it when Trump did much the same thing for “anti-Semitism”? Trump’s Executive Order 13899 criminalizes criticism of Israel by making any protest of Israel’s genocide and ethnic cleansing synonymous with “anti-Semitism.” It brands student protesters “pro-Hamas terrorists” and gives the DOJ the green light to prosecute and, in the case of foreign students, deport them. In other words, Trump is selling our constitution rights to AIPAC for whatever millions Miriam Adelson has given him. Now, there’s an issue to write about.
Comparing apples and oranges? These are not peaceful protests. They are threatening, harassing and preventing Jewish students from attending classes, occupying and damaging campus buildings and interfering in education practices. How is this similar to a lady silently praying across the street from an abortion clinic or keeping Nazi literature inside one’s home? When protests escalate into violence or impede the civil rights of others, then it’s time to draw the line. Hate Israel and the Jewish people if you must. It’s your right. But once you escalate it into infringing on another’s rights, or causing damage to another’s property, then it crosses the line and is no longer a right and breaks the law. I would not support violent protests against Iran and Iranians in the U.S. as well or any other violent protests. Free speech should not be suppressed, but violent protests should be, no matter what the purpose.
Anti-Semites can’t tell the difference between peaceful protest and violence. Their limited minds focus on hate instead of logic.
Israelis and the U.S. are blocking people from food and water, so once you “infringe on another’s rights,” it crosses the line. Thus the protests, and police beating a crowd doesn’t make them violent.
Maenad, you sound like one of those lovers of violence that not only aren’t logical but are ignorant of the facts. Do you know what the year 2005 means? Israel left Gaza and forcibly removed all Israeli’s living in the area. They left greenhouses and developed land. What did the Gazan’s do? They destroyed the infrastructure, voted Hamas into power and continuously attacked Israeli women and children.
Do not give Islamists and terrorists an inch. Designate the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization.
This post is fundamentally not any different than yesterday’s 2nd amendment post. Hate speech laws are to free speech as “duty to retreat” laws are to self defense. Making it illegal to criticize Islam because radicalized Muslims are committing acts of terror, is as egregious as making it illegal to use deadly force instead of retreating as a self-defense option.
Damn this stupid time change!!! Here it is, me out in the rain slopping the chickens and getting eggs and getting wet and the big dogs’ feet are all muddy!!! And I have to get up a damn hour early, and my stupid head hurts from drinking. I need some Taco Bell but I am not driving up to the truck stop looking like this!!! Anyway, the stupid Brits need an Irish Poem, then I am going back to bed for another hour.
True Brit???
An Irish Poem by Squeeky Fromm
There once were some people called Brits,
Whose leaders were nothing but sh!ts!
If you dared to say “wog”
Even tipsy on grog,
The Bobbies would swarm in a blitz!
#74. Aw heck, go to the truck stop anyway…
… And the government there is the pits.
“The APPG included criticism of Islamic beliefs and practices as examples of Islamophobia.”
At the same time, the UK government claims that:
“The group’s proposed definition must be compatible with the unchanging right of British citizens to exercise freedom of speech and expression – which includes the right to criticise, express dislike of, or insult religions and/or the beliefs and practices of adherents.”
Pray tell, UK censors, how do you intend to pull off that contradiction?
Think you have the wrong blog to address the UK government on policy. Then why would they need to tell you?
On a tour of Berlin our guide told us the things that were illegal to say/do in Germany such as a Nazi flag or salute. I asked how you know the “bad guys” if they can’t speak out; she said “we know.” Makes me wonder if Germany, the UK and other European countries might be using Alexa to keep an eye on everyone everywhere always anyway!
First off, people like to exaggerate things. If a German tour guide states alexa is the source it’s an obvious lie.
The U.S. should withdraw from NATO and form a new alliance with the former Warsaw Pact countries. Absolute Conditions for admission: free speech and elections!
The purpose of the new alliance will be to keep Moscow out of the Baltics and Brussels out of local elections. It will also encourage members to stay oriented with real freedom.
The former Warsaw Pact countries understand more about freedom than many of freedom’s erstwhile defenders. They deserve a more robust (and less meddlesome) military alliance.
I would call it the Freedom Alliance, or something like that.
Britain, France, and Germany contribute nichts to NATO. Without the U.S., NATO is just a string of officers’ clubs, paid for by the U.S., in which every deadbeat gets a veto over U.S. decision making.
Hey stupid, the subject is free speech in the UK.
He’s a lot smarter than you, which you demonstrate by not being able to see the connection between his proposal and the article’s topic.
Those 3 countries contribute ~2% of their GDP to NATO. Why do you lie?
Still less than 2%, and they’ll never make 5%.
It won’t be blasphemy if they say anything negative toward Christ, Christians or Christianity. Funny how that works – the “faith”-based groups that will gladly off the heads of those that offend it get the pig-glove treatment, whereas those who just want to be the left do not.
Reminds me of the scene in the original Star Wars: Let the Wookie win. Why? Because droids don’t rip your arms off when they lose.
Vance was right in his dressing down of Europe. The USA should withhold all support from those countries that do not adhere to the values enumerated by our constitution.
All support. Really? So many stupid and ignorant commenters.
Hey buddy, your guys had almost all of the media, nearly all of academia, completely owned the DOJ, FBI, IRS, and even populated the Pentagon with a lot of bulging skirts… still LOST. You lost because you weren’t just stupid–you were degenerate weird and sanctimonious and tyrannical about it.
You can’t be fixed, but I hope your demotion to troll is giving you some solace.
Yes, including the removal of all of our military personnel and equipment. Including the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System. If we can’t take it with us after dismantling it, we should render it useless. We simply cannot let our technology fall into hostile hands.
Guys! ARRESTED FOR SIGNING KUNG FU FIGHTERS… bruh what a bunch of wimps
SINGING*
The fact it took the UK until 2008 to eliminate its blasphemy laws, says all you need to know about them.
All? Come on, what a brainless comment.
Great article! Thanks!
I think UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s ideology is toxic. Can he be sent to jail under UK standards?
I think your comment is toxic, and sent to jail.
Anon: I think your syntax is toxic. (Look it up).