New York Times reconsiders its position on offensive speech, is cool with First Amendment again

Brett T. | 3:49 PM on June 20, 2017

The Supreme Court on Monday decided the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office couldn’t deny a trademark to the Slants, an Asian-American band, on the basis that the name could be considered disparaging.

Following that decision, which the New York Times decided was “the right call,” the paper had a change of heart over its stance on the Washington Redskins.

Make no mistake: the editorial board still considers the name offensive, but apparently the Supreme Court’s 8—0 ruling that the First Amendment protects offensive speech provided a needed wake-up call during a dangerous time, when gangs of masked “antifascists” take it upon themselves to police peaceful assemblies for “hate speech” and apply pepper spray as they see fit.

NYTimes editorial: "oh, right. First Amendment. We've reconsidered our position on the Redskins." https://t.co/vFECbZddiE pic.twitter.com/eHMHWCd3mK

— Gabriel Malor (@gabrielmalor) June 20, 2017

BREAKING: @nytimes: Oh, you mean THAT 1st Amendment!

— Grandpa Mohawks Son (@MRKokoski) June 20, 2017

https://twitter.com/gamecocklaw/status/877171443129298946

Why does it take #SCOTUS before @nytimes stops being (at least temporarily) vehemently anti-First Amendment? ? #FirstAmendmentBitchslap

— Seth Stokes-Leifeste (@texasrebelaggie) June 20, 2017