With the recent conviction of Shiloh Hendrix of disorderly conduct in
Minnesota for saying a no-no word to a guy who was goading her to do it,
this marks the latest chipping away of the 1st Amendment to punish what the Left calls 'hate speech'.

Despite the Supreme Court having ruled repeatedly that hate speech isn't a thing in America-- that hate speech is protected speech under the 1st Amendment-- prosecutors and government officials across the country have
done an end run around both the Supreme Court and the Constitution by
turning vague catch-all misdemeanors like disorderly conduct into de facto
hate speech laws.

Say something the woke establishment doesn't like? You won't get charged
with hate speech. They'll just arrest you for being disorderly.

Even under Minnesota's disorderly conduct law, however, Hendrix should have been acquitted as a matter of law because the cameraman was literally
begging her to use the racial slur and when she did, he was giddy about it, saying how viral it will go, etc. One of the elements of disorderly conduct
is that it must cause alarm, distress, or fear. Obviously the 'victim' here
was none of those things. He *wanted* her to say the word and was happy
when she delivered on his request. How does that even meet the basic
elements of disorderly conduct?

Hendrix's attorney has given notice that they will be appealing to federal court on 1st Amendment grounds where this bullshit will almost certainly be completely overturned-- and she can afford to do it with a GoFundMe sitting just shy of $1 million-- but it's just one more example of the Left's
constant war on free speech in furtherance of their woke agenda. And yes,
it's the Left because this never happens the other way around. When was the last time you saw pro-Palestine protesters arrested for saying, "From the
river to the sea", which is a literal call for mass murder? Seems like that would fit this exciting new definition of 'disorderly conduct', yet it
never happens. Only people who offend the Left ever find themselves facing these speech-as-conduct charges.

Here's just a few more examples of people that have engaged in 1st Amendment-protected speech, who nevertheless found themselves facing
criminal charges from woke leftist officials:

Two white 14-year-olds in Louisiana were charged with "inciting a riot" and "hate crime" for posting a video where they sang along to a rap song and
said the word 'nigga' along with the rapper in the song.

Several men in New Hampshire were charged with "civil rights violations"
for displaying a "Keep New England White" banner.

A law student at the University of Oklahoma was expelled and then subjected
to interrogation by an FBI counterterrorism unit for printing the phrase
"It's okay to be white" on pieces of paper and handing them out.

Thankfully the higher courts are smacking these down as they come up, but leftist DAs and politicians seem to be adopting a "the process is the punishment" approach to censorship. They know the charges and convictions
will eventually be thrown out but the defendants will have their lives
upturned and have to spend a fortune fighting it before that happens, which sends a message to anyone else who might be thinking of saying things the
Left doesn't like.

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

BTR1701 <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:

With the recent conviction of Shiloh Hendrix of disorderly conduct in >Minnesota for saying a no-no word to a guy who was goading her to do it,
this marks the latest chipping away of the 1st Amendment to punish what the >Left calls 'hate speech'.

I found a news report. She was not convicted of behavior toward the boy
but of the man videoing her. The news report does not explain the
prosecution's argument as to what made the conduct illegal. It's got to
be more than just words. It doesn't even say she made a threat.

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2026/07/24/shiloh-hendrix-found-guilty-in-rochester-racial-slur-case-of-one-count-of-disorderly-conduct

Despite the Supreme Court having ruled repeatedly that hate speech isn't a >thing in America-- that hate speech is protected speech under the 1st >Amendment-- prosecutors and government officials across the country have
done an end run around both the Supreme Court and the Constitution by
turning vague catch-all misdemeanors like disorderly conduct into de facto >hate speech laws.

Say something the woke establishment doesn't like? You won't get charged
with hate speech. They'll just arrest you for being disorderly.

Even under Minnesota's disorderly conduct law, however, Hendrix should have >been acquitted as a matter of law because the cameraman was literally
begging her to use the racial slur and when she did, he was giddy about it, >saying how viral it will go, etc. One of the elements of disorderly conduct >is that it must cause alarm, distress, or fear. Obviously the 'victim' here >was none of those things. He *wanted* her to say the word and was happy
when she delivered on his request. How does that even meet the basic
elements of disorderly conduct?

I haven't spotted this in a news report, but that does sound like he made it worse.

. . .

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On Sat, 25 Jul 2026 19:40:55 +0000, BTR1701 <no_email@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

With the recent conviction of Shiloh Hendrix of disorderly conduct in >Minnesota for saying a no-no word to a guy who was goading her to do it,
this marks the latest chipping away of the 1st Amendment to punish what the >Left calls 'hate speech'.

Despite the Supreme Court having ruled repeatedly that hate speech isn't a >thing in America-- that hate speech is protected speech under the 1st >Amendment-- prosecutors and government officials across the country have
done an end run around both the Supreme Court and the Constitution by
turning vague catch-all misdemeanors like disorderly conduct into de facto >hate speech laws.

Say something the woke establishment doesn't like? You won't get charged
with hate speech. They'll just arrest you for being disorderly.

Even under Minnesota's disorderly conduct law, however, Hendrix should have >been acquitted as a matter of law because the cameraman was literally
begging her to use the racial slur and when she did, he was giddy about it, >saying how viral it will go, etc. One of the elements of disorderly conduct >is that it must cause alarm, distress, or fear. Obviously the 'victim' here >was none of those things. He *wanted* her to say the word and was happy
when she delivered on his request. How does that even meet the basic
elements of disorderly conduct?

Hendrix's attorney has given notice that they will be appealing to federal >court on 1st Amendment grounds where this bullshit will almost certainly be >completely overturned-- and she can afford to do it with a GoFundMe sitting >just shy of $1 million-- but it's just one more example of the Left's >constant war on free speech in furtherance of their woke agenda. And yes, >it's the Left because this never happens the other way around. When was the >last time you saw pro-Palestine protesters arrested for saying, "From the >river to the sea", which is a literal call for mass murder? Seems like that >would fit this exciting new definition of 'disorderly conduct', yet it
never happens. Only people who offend the Left ever find themselves facing >these speech-as-conduct charges.

Here's just a few more examples of people that have engaged in 1st >Amendment-protected speech, who nevertheless found themselves facing
criminal charges from woke leftist officials:

Two white 14-year-olds in Louisiana were charged with "inciting a riot" and >"hate crime" for posting a video where they sang along to a rap song and
said the word 'nigga' along with the rapper in the song.

Several men in New Hampshire were charged with "civil rights violations"
for displaying a "Keep New England White" banner.

A law student at the University of Oklahoma was expelled and then subjected >to interrogation by an FBI counterterrorism unit for printing the phrase >"It's okay to be white" on pieces of paper and handing them out.

Thankfully the higher courts are smacking these down as they come up, but >leftist DAs and politicians seem to be adopting a "the process is the >punishment" approach to censorship. They know the charges and convictions >will eventually be thrown out but the defendants will have their lives >upturned and have to spend a fortune fighting it before that happens, which >sends a message to anyone else who might be thinking of saying things the >Left doesn't like.

The appeals need to include a demand for the state to compensate the
falsely accused when they push a case that is clearly
unconstitutional.

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)