Tensions are understandably high after the horrifying bloodshed resulting from the Hamas terrorist attack on Israelis this past weekend and the subsequent threat of a “complete siege” of Gaza. Far beyond the site of conflict, incendiary statements are leading to ongoing debates over what’s socially acceptable to say after, and during, a highly politicized tragedy.
But amidst our quest to set social parameters around what should be expressed, we often find coinciding legal efforts to define what can be expressed, to the detriment of our free speech rights.
Nowhere was this threat more evident than in the U.K. Home Secretary Suella Braverman’s letter this week to chief constables in England and Wales. In it, Braverman advised officers not just to focus on policing “explicit pro-Hamas symbols and chants” but to consider whether other expression—referencing Palestinians, not Hamas—could constitute a criminal offense.