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.
— Gabriel Malor (@gabrielmalor) June 20, 2017
BREAKING: @nytimes: Oh, you mean THAT 1st Amendment!
— Grandpa Mohawks Son (@MRKokoski) June 20, 2017
— Seth Stokes-Leifeste (@texasrebelaggie) June 20, 2017
That pesky old Constitution is always popping up in the most inconvenient places.
— JayT (@jaytbones) June 20, 2017
Reconsidering previous positions is kind of a hallmark of critical open-minded thinking.
— Steven Mazie (@stevenmazie) June 20, 2017
The First Amendment fosters critical open-minded thinking. Lets choose to digest news from sources who can grasp this simple concept.
— Joshua Templeton (@JoshuaTempSays) June 20, 2017
Here’s a real challenge:
* * *
'R-word? LOL': Washington Post will no longer write 'Redskins' in editorials http://t.co/2EYTkJvHQn
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) August 22, 2014