Tournament: CPS | Round: 2 | Opponent: idk | Judge: idk

In the U.S. most forms of hate speech are protected, the imminent violence requirement allows for this. IABA

(2016). Iaba.us. Retrieved 16 December 2016, from http://www.iaba.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/11.21.pdf
The United States Supreme Court has defined hate speech as any communication that disparages a
AND
as an imminent threat, and would likely be protected bythe First Amendment.

The current "fighting words" doctrine presupposes that the 2 participants are of equal power, however hate speech usually occurs towards minorities, and has worse effects. Lawrence

Lawrence, C. R. (1990). If He Hollers Let Him Go: Regulating Racist Speech on Campus. Duke Law Journal, 1990(3), 431. doi:10.2307/1372554
A second factor that distinguishes racial insults from protected speech is the preemptive nature of
AND
is the effect of pervasive racial and sexual violence and coercion on individual.

Impact

Face to face racial insults are harmful to speech, and the effects are instantaneous. Lawrence

Lawrence, C. R. (1990). If He Hollers Let Him Go: Regulating Racist Speech on Campus. Duke Law Journal, 1990(3), 431. doi:10.2307/1372554
This regulation and others like it have been characterized in the press as the work
AND
of response until well after the assault when the cowardly assaulter has departed.

Hate speech acts as justification of genocide. Delgado 14:

Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic ~University and Research Professors respectively, Seattle University School of Law~. "Four Observations of Hate Speech". Wake Forest Law Review. 2014. http://wakeforestlawreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Delgado_LawReview_01.09.pdf
Recent scholarship shows how practically every instance of genocide came on the heels of a
AND
doing it—otherwise, no one but a sadist would join in.

CP Text: Universities will expand free speech zones across campuses but will have hate speech regulations.

Students should be disciplined for hate speech. Battaglia

Jack M. Battaglia, Regulation of Hate Speech by Educational Institutions: A Proposed Policy, 31 Santa Clara L. Rev. 345 (1991).
A student.9 2 who intentionally or recklessly uses hate speech, under such
AND
policy is sufficiently protective of first amendment interests that similar treatment is justified.

Universities should regulate hate speech everywhere on campus and provide equal learning opportunities. Lawrence

Lawrence, C. R. (1990). If He Hollers Let Him Go: Regulating Racist Speech on Campus. Duke Law Journal, 1990(3), 431. doi:10.2307/1372554
The proposed Stanford regulation, and indeed regulations with considerably broader reach, can be
AND
since I'm not allowing hateful rhetoric
The cp is a prior question -