Don Imus was fired by a COMPANY, not the state. That is - he
didn't break any laws, or at least he wasn't accused of breaking any
laws.
Think of it this way: If somebody says something you don't like,
you don't have to invite them back for dinner.
Similarly, if Imus' studio doesn't like what Imus says, they don't have
to invite him back to talk. Actually, they might have to if they
have a contract with him (which they did) ... except that contract
had an out which basically came to some sort of decency clause,
which the company exercized.
Now, Tim Hardaway could get fired or shunned or lord only knows
what, but the STATE cannot take any action against him unless he
violates a specific law (which insulting homosexuals does not do).
Where it gets dicey is when an insult takes on a threatening tone.
Threatening somebody with physical violence IS illegal.
Publishing statements that are not true about somebody which
causes them measurable damage is still not illegal. It is, however,
cause for a law suit.
2007-06-01 09:08:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by Elana 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think a 1st amendment lawyer would say that every example you wrote can be said without the state's interference. Imus being fired is not a 1st amendment issue since the state had nothing to do with the firing.
The law originally assumed that you did not own your reputation, the public did. Anyone can say anything about you publicly and recourse is improbable.
With hate-crime legislation, that is no longer true. But again, a first amendment lawyer would say that hate-crime legislation is extra-constitutional at best and before long, the Supreme Court will probably defeat it.
I'd rather live in a world where one is occasionally subject to being called a name as opposed to the alternative (which is where we are hea constitutional ded if we are not careful.)
Read Ayn rand. you need not have a law degree to cull through her ultra rational musings on just this sort of topic.
2007-06-01 09:13:52
·
answer #2
·
answered by Curt 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
No, I'm not a lawyer, but I seriously doubt that you'll be able successfully to sue someone for name calling in public. I believe you have to be able to prove in a civil case how it damaged you and find a dollar amount. Simple name calling, as hurtful as it might be, likely wouldn't be enough to win a law suit.
If that were the case, there would be a lot more law suits out there because there are a lot of ignorant people throwing names around to make themselves feel better about their lives.
Don Imus can get fired because he was employed and broke company policies and standards. People can denounce gays due to freedom of speech, regardless of how ignorant the speech may be. Freedom of speech doesn't apply to Imus being able to keep his job because he was being paid by a corporation who have their own sets of rules and standards that he has to obey. He didn't, so he lost his job.
2007-06-01 09:18:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by Jen 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
All Girls: Katherine Natasha Melody Evelyn Alison Collette Stephanie Joan All Boys: Nicholas Alexander Toby Oliver Jonathan Patrick Ivan Harley 3 Girls 1 boy: Jillian Piper Haley Evelyn Angelica Louise Hamish Alastair 3 Boys 1 girl: Calvin Zachary Steven Parker Jacob Oliver Ruby Olivia 2 Boys 2 Girls: Leo Mason Graham Vince Ivy Madelyn Angela Bree
2016-04-01 09:57:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Imus wasn't fired because he broke any law. He was fired because his bosses thought they were going to lose listeners and MONEY if they didn't. If you want to sue someone for calling you what you consider an offensive name, you can probably find a lawyer to do it. There is no hard and fast rule about it. But eventually, you would have to prove that it really harmed you in some way (not just hurt your feelings) that can be reduced to a dollar amount.
2007-06-01 09:05:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by MOM KNOWS EVERYTHING 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
The first ammendment gives you freedom of speech.
That does not allow you to act irresponsibly so that your speech might cause injury, riot, etc. (as in the ol' fire in a crowded movie house example)
Now there are actual laws against "hate speech" in different states. Whether these are constitutional are doubtful....
BUT, You can sue me for anything, including singing Yankee Doodle in public (an obscene act if you ever heard me sing)
AND a jury could find in your favor
AND the supreme court could find the ruling as constitutional even though it is a clear violation of my free speech rights.
Bottom line.
The constitution gives us rights, but it is up to a group of (increasingly confused) people to uphold them. And sometimes they don't.
2007-06-01 09:06:15
·
answer #6
·
answered by Salami and Orange Juice 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
You have the right to free speech, but if you go to your job and call someone a nappy headed ho then the employer reserves the right to fire you if they have a policy against vulgar language.
2007-06-01 09:07:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by a rare oddity 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Although you might not like what they say they have every right in this country to say it.
The First Amendment applies to douche bags too.
2007-06-01 09:16:38
·
answer #8
·
answered by freemulch 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
You can sue anybody you want as long as you get a jury to believe you.
It's called preponderance of evidence
2007-06-01 09:06:02
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
depends on who u are and where and what u say.
and yes you can sue anyone for anything don't mean you will win tho. and just might end up paying if they find it was frivolous
2007-06-01 09:06:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by whitebeanner 4
·
0⤊
0⤋