In 1969, the Supreme Court clarified the issue in Brandenberg v. Ohio. Brandenberg, a KKK leader, has spoken about taking revenge on blacks and Jews at a rally of the group and was subsequently charged with advocating violence. The Supreme Court ruled that the Ohio law was unconstitutional.
Advocacy of force or criminal activity does not receive First Amendment protections if (1) the advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and (2) is likely to incite or produce such action.
I'm not a lawyer, but I suspect that she'd be found "Not guilty" if charged. You'd have to show that a reasonable person would believe that saying white people need to die would result in someone in the audience murdering white people. She would also have to have encouraged them to do it soon. You've got some wiggle room there, but no time frame is mentioned.
In 1969, the Supreme Court clarified the issue in Brandenberg v. Ohio. Brandenberg, a KKK leader, has spoken about taking revenge on blacks and Jews at a rally of the group and was subsequently charged with advocating violence. The Supreme Court ruled that the Ohio law was unconstitutional.
I'm not a lawyer, but I suspect that she'd be found "Not guilty" if charged. You'd have to show that a reasonable person would believe that saying white people need to die would result in someone in the audience murdering white people. She would also have to have encouraged them to do it soon. You've got some wiggle room there, but no time frame is mentioned.
Thanks for clarifying. Still pisses me off that nobody is condemning this