Robert Kahn is a law professor at St. Thomas University School of Law in Minneapolis, Minnesota. His 2004 book “Holocaust Denial and the Law: A Comparative Study” examines Holocaust denial litigation. He has also written about mask mandates during COVID, cross-burning in the United States, blasphemy regulation and use of law to ban statements about the past. (See Kahn’s biography on St. Thomas University’s webpage.)
More Articles from this Author
Anti-Mask Laws
Most anti-mask laws do not target specific groups. Instead, they typically ban mask wearing that intimidates. Opponents of such laws invoke First Amendment freedom of association.
Cross Burning
Cross burning, which has been used as a form of intimidation against African Americans and Jews, has been defended in the courts on free speech grounds.
De Scandalis Magnatum
Enacted in 13th century England, the series of laws known as De Scandalis Magnatum made it illegal knowingly to spread false rumors that cause public mischief.
Holocaust Denial
While other countries have prosecuted Holocaust deniers, the United States has had a different response, due to the freedom of speech ensured in the First Amendment.
Islam
Islam has several unique religious free exercise issues stemming from the First Amendment; however, the establishment clause has roused little debate.
Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich (1976)
Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich (1976) ruled that the First Amendment prevented the state from becoming entangled in hierarchical church decisions.
United States v. Ballard (1944)
In United States v. Ballard (1944), the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment prohibited courts from inquiring into the truth or falsity of religious beliefs.
Virginia v. Black (2003)
Virginia v. Black (2003) upheld a statute making it illegal to burn a cross in public to intimidate others. Cross burning was a true threat unprotected by the First Amendment.