The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can punish Ku Klux Klan members and others who burn crosses, finding that a burning cross represents such an instrument of racial terror that it overshadows free speech considerations, the Associated Press reported.
Voting 6-3, the court upheld a 50-year-old Virginia state law making it a crime to burn a cross as an act of intimidation. A lower court had ruled that the state law infringed on free speech rights.
Writing for the majority, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said the protections afforded by the First Amendment do not necessarily shield those who burn crosses and "are not absolute."
Justice Clarence Thomas, the only black Supreme Court justice, wrote that "those who hate cannot terrorize and intimidate to make their point."
Past Supreme Court decisions have upheld the rights of unpopular groups and causes, including flag burners, pornographers, strippers, and demonstrators who use swastikas in public assemblies.
While swastikas are arguably a more powerful symbol of racism, burning crosses invariably strikes more fear in people. The days of Klansmen taking night rides throughout the south, setting crosses on fire, and intimidating blacks and civil rights activists are mostly gone.
This is yet another blow to the most infamous white power group in the world.
"A burning cross is a symbol like no other. It doesn't just say we don't like you. The message is we are going to do you harm," Jerry W. Kilgore, Virginia Attorney General, said.
Several states have anti-cross burning laws, including California, Connecticut, Delaware, Montana, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and Washington.
Questions do arise, though. Where will Supreme Court decisions continue to draw the line between hate speech and free speech? Will Confederate flags and swastikas be next?
This could well be a slippery slope for free speech rights. The rights of other hate groups may soon be challenged. We should all consider how far we want to restrict free expression, regardless of popularity.