Реферат: Mitchell V Wisconsin Essay Research Paper

of ideas and expression in the marketplace of ideas?.

Chief Justice Rehnquist, however, rejects the notion that the

Wisconsin statute could have a chilling effect on speech. ?We must

conjure up a vision of a Wisconsin citizen suppressing his unpopular

bigoted opinions for fear that if he later commits an offense covered

by the statute, these opinions will be offered at trial to establish

that he selected his victim on account of the victim?s protected

status, thus qualifying him for penalty enhancement… This is too

speculative a hypothesis to support Mitchell?s overbreadth claim.?

However, a legitimate argument certainly exists that the logical next

step would be to examine the conversations, correspondence, and other

expressions of the accused person to determine whether a hate motive

prompted the crime, if a criminal?s sentence is being considered for

penalty enhancement (Feingold, 16). How can Rehnquist argue that

this will not cause a chilling effect?

Rehnquist denies this chilling effect exists under penalty

enhancement laws such as Wisconsin?s, but one must consider how

Rehnquist would rule if the penalty enhancement did not cover

something, such as racism, that he finds personally repugnant. The

recent attempt at ?political correctness? differs only slightly from

the Red Scare of the 1950?s. The anti-communists claimed and the

politically correct ideologists claim to have good intentions (The

Road to Hell…).Unfortunately, these two groups infringed upon the

rights of the minority in their quest to mold the htoughts of others

into ideas similar to their own.

How would Rehnquist rule if the statute called for enhanced penalties

for persons convicted of crimes while expressing Communist ideas? Or

what if the criminal was Mormon, and the majority found those

religious views morally repugnant? Could Rehnquist also justify