04/17/2017

Court Revives Harassment Lawsuit Over Blog Posts, Menacing Free Speech

Hans Bader, Liberty Unyielding

A recent ruling by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals menaces free speech in condominiums, apartment buildings, and the Internet. It allowed individual bloggers to be sued because their blog posts allegedly created a “hostile housing environment” for condo residents who kept emotional-support dogs despite the condominium’s no-dogs rule. This “hostile environment” allegedly rendered those blog posts “harassment” in violation of the Fair Housing Act. The provision the court cited does not even mention a hostile environment, but rather makes it illegal “to coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere” with the exercise or enjoyment of rights under the Fair Housing Act. (See 42 USC 3617).

Alarmingly, the court’s ruling in Revock v. Cowpet Bay West Condominium Association also suggested that a single sufficiently offensive blog post could potentially constitute illegal “harassment.” It stated in dictum that “a single act may be sufficient, provided that the conduct is ‘sufficiently severe or pervasive.’” This was a gratuitous statement, since each of the bloggers it allowed to be sued posted multiple blog posts critical of the allegedly disabled plaintiffs.

The court justified this extremely expansive reading of the statute by citing a speech-restrictive regulation imposed by the Obama administration that purports to interpret the statute. After defining illegal interference to include the creation of a “hostile environment,” that regulation states that “[h]arassment can be written, verbal, or other conduct, and does not require physical contact.” 24 C.F.R. § 100.600(b) (2016). In addition, “[a] single incident of harassment because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or handicap may constitute a discriminatory housing practice, where the incident is sufficiently severe to create a hostile environment, or evidences a quid pro quo.” 24 C.F.R. § 100.600(c) (2016).

Courts are not supposed to defer to agencies at the expense of free speech. Had the bloggers raised a First Amendment defense, deferring to the Obama administration’s speech-restrictive interpretation of the statute would be an error.  Even when an agency would otherwise receive great deference in interpreting a statute, it will not receive any deference from the courts where its interpretation would raise potential free-speech problems. The Supreme Court has made this point in the past. (SeeEdward J. DeBartolo Corp. v. Florida Gulf Coast Building & Constr. Trades Council, 485 U. S. 568, 574-575 (1988) (construing National Labor Relations Act narrowly to avoid potential free-speech problems, despite the broad Chevron deference that the NLRB’s interpretation usually receives).

But here, no First Amendment defense seems to have been raised, so it is not clear how free speech principles should have shaped the court’s interpretation of the statute.

Read full article



You May Also Like:

Lois Lerner Doesn’t Trust You William McGurn, The Wall Street Journal

The Fed Is Getting A New Head. But Thinking Is What's Needed Steve Forbes, Forbes.com

Men, Stop Virtue-Signaling And Return To Rules Ben Shapiro, National Review

FCC Lays Out Plan To Roll Back "Net Neutrality” CBS News

Report: Conyers Settled Wrongful Dismissal Complaint Over 'Sexual Advances’ [Watch] Olivia Beavers, The Hill

Why Have Liberals Been Such Horrendous Hypocrites On Women's Rights? Roger L. Simon, PJ Media

Bernie, Stop Fibbing About Canada's Single-Payer Disaster Sally C. Pipes, Investor’s Business Daily

Hillary: Corrupt, Clueless, Coddled David Prentice, American Thinker

Rule By One Man: Judge Declares Sanctuary Cities Law Of The Land Daniel Horowitz, Conservative Review

Janet Yellen Leaving Federal Reserve In 2018: Good Riddance [Watch] Andrew Moran, Economic Collapse News

How Fewer Obamacare Options Hurt A 4-Year-Old Robert Moffit, Daily Signal

Socialist Academics Contributed To The Rise Of The Third Reich Brittany Hunter, Foundation for Economic Education

The Perfect Coda For Cordray's Tenure: Nullifying The Payday Lending Rule Norbert Michel, Forbes.com

Why Amazon Is Buying Up All Those Cryptocurrency URLs James Poulos, The Federalist

How Two Governments Protect Liberty Better Than One John O. McGinnis, Library of Law and Liberty

For More go to the Home Page >>>

Search

Bookshelf

FreeMarket Central

Some titles recent, all recommended -

Special Video Feature

FreeMarket Central

Voices From The 2017 International Students For Liberty Conference

In Search Of History

When America Was Truly The Land Of Opportunity

For [early immigrants] America was truly the land of opportunity. For the first time in their lives, many were truly free to pursue their own objectives. That freedom released the human energies which created the United States. There were few government programs to turn to and nobody expected them. But also there were few rules and regulations. There were no licenses, no permits, no red tape to restrict them. They found, in fact, a free market, and most of them thrived on it. 

-- Milton Friedman,

Shadow Stats Snapshot


FreeMarket Central

ShadowStats alternate economic indicators are based on the methodology of noted economist John Williams, specialist in government economic reporting.

  • Unemployment:
    FreeMarket Central BLS: 4.1%
    FreeMarket Central Shadow Stats: 21.6%
  • Inflation:
    FreeMarket Central October Year-to-Year: 2.23% (CPI-U*)
    FreeMarket Central Shadow Stats: 10.0%

*[cpi-u is the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation rate for all urban consumers]