Washington, DC's Metro this week removed transit ads placed by Milo Yiannopoulos for his new book, Dangerous.
Riders complained via Twitter the ads from the former editor of Breitbart News had no place in public.
The transit agency defended its action by claiming the ads violated its advertising guidelines.
“Advertisements that are intended to influence public policy are prohibited,” Metro said, although it decorates trains and stations endlessly with public-policy ads.
In a statement, Yiannopoulos asked Metro officials, "Is my face a hate crime?"
Until last month, a Constitutional lawyer (I'm not one) might argue, "Yes."
But the Supreme Court says differently.
In June, it unanimously ruled disparagement of minorities— Yiannopoulos' stock in trade—is protected under the First Amendment.
Justice Samuel Alito, in Matal v. Tam, wrote that government restrictions on speech expressing offensive ideas "strikes at the heart of the First Amendment.
"Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express 'the thought that we hate.'”
In June, it unanimously ruled disparagement of minorities— Yiannopoulos' stock in trade—is protected under the First Amendment.
Justice Samuel Alito, in Matal v. Tam, wrote that government restrictions on speech expressing offensive ideas "strikes at the heart of the First Amendment.
"Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express 'the thought that we hate.'”
