It’s funny to see the SELF LIMITATIONS on the Bill of Rights placed by so called conservatives, and free speech liberals BY THEMSELVES.

This morning I listened to Geraldo agree with Trump that if we substituted Jews for Muslims in every statement Pam Gellar made, we would all be shutting Gellar up.

As if this is NOT precisely what happened, and all the forces of free speech did not line up AGAINST the Jews. And those forces were RIGHT (correct).

In 1977 Skokie, Illinois ONE out of EVERY SIX people were Holocaust survivors.

Therefore the Nazis proposed to stage a march there. Whatever they had to say DIDN’T MATTER.

No one was worried that the ‘fighting words’ of the Nazis in the face of the survivors was going to cause all the Jews to attack, although increased insurance bondage was used to discourage the march. No Jews called for jihad.

In the end, about 20 or so  Nazis congregated for only ten minutes, and throngs of Jewish and other groups were simply drowning out their voices.

So Mr’s. Trump and Rivera and all so worried about OFFENSES, check your nation and understand the PURPOSE of the 1st amendment..

Responses to this INCREDIBLY OFFENSIVE idea were LEGAL.

Responses to this INCREDIBLY OFFENSIVE idea were LEGAL.

Pamela Gellar DOES self promote. SO WHAT? That’s why BIll Clinton is UNEMBARRASSED to get every last $ of speaking fees. And that has absolutely NOTHING to do with free speech.

Free speech will ALWAYS, 100% of the time, progress to blasphemy.

This is OUR way of life vs someone else’s and I’m sorry but those limiting free speech so as not to offend have ALREADY LOST.

O’Reilly et al are literally DEAD WRONG, and Ms M Kelly is 100% right.

And I am sure where folks like Henry Jackson, Hubert Humphrey and LBJ would be on Garland

Here is the actual chronological story:

In 1977, the leader of the Nationalist Socialist Party of America, Frank Collin, announced a march through the Chicago suburb of Skokie, Ill. While a neo-Nazi march would be controversial under any circumstances, the fact that one out of six people in Skokie were Holocaust survivors made it even more provocative. Chicago authorities took steps to prevent it, including requiring the NSPA to post $350,000 worth of liability insurance in case any damage occurred. Authorities also banned the display of Nazi images, explaining that the violence that might have been incited overrode free speech protections.

The dispute drew national attention. After the march was initially cancelled, the ACLU took up the case at the urging of Jewish lawyer Joseph Burton, who defended the NSPA’s right to freedom of speech and assembly. Victor Rosenblum, a professor of law at Northwestern University and past chairman of the Anti-Defamation League’s Chicago branch, made the counter-argument: “The Nazis’ march in paraphernalia is a reminder of the most destructive movement in history. They stand for the destruction and wiping out of human beings. This is not constitutionally protected.”

An initial court ruling said the NSPA could march in uniform but not display the swastika, finding that the symbol constitutes “fighting words” unprotected by the Constitution. The court also upheld the liability insurance requirement, despite the fact that it effectively would have made the rally unfeasible. The case was challenged in the Supreme Court in 1977, which declined to overturn the lower court ruling but instructed the state of Illinois to “provide strict procedural safeguards” if it moved to limit free speech.

In January 1978, the Illinois Supreme Court decided that the NSPA march was constitutionally protected, including the right to wear swastikas, ruling that “the display of the swastika, as offensive to the principles of a free nation as the memories it recalls may be, is symbolic political speech intended to convey to the public the beliefs of those who display it.” In February, a federal court went even further, ruling that the ordinances intended to prevent the march were unconstitutional.