Redskins name Banned?

[rocket surgeon]

images like this never helped

https://i.imgur.com/duMojKG.gifv

i think your intentions were in jest, but popeye appeared to be defending himself and his woman-eyn'a?  could have been a fill-in-the-blank person and i think it could be defended however, we aren't allowed to see the entire context of the situation

[Pakuni]

ESPN is OK with "Redskins," but not so much "Caucasians."

http://awfulannouncing.com/2016/espn-told-bomani-jones-to-cover-up-caucasians-t-shirt.html

[brandx]

ESPN is OK with "Redskins," but not so much "Caucasians."

http://awfulannouncing.com/2016/espn-told-bomani-jones-to-cover-up-caucasians-t-shirt.html

Whites are being persecuted so horrifically in this country in the 21st century that eSPN had no other options here.

Finally, someone is courageous enough to stand up to black and Native American privilege.

[rocket surgeon]

where can i get my shirt?  i can already hear the criticism-white supremacist, arian nation, racist.  i can however look past that because the shirt doesn't offend me and i know i am not a racist.  i wouldn't exactly wear it, walking down martin luther king blvd though. 

[muwarrior69]

You are making my point.  If alumni want to bribe Marquette into changing their name back, it is going to take a lot more money than a paltry $2 million.

Hmm....I wonder what Lovell's price is? But then Warriors....priceless.

[WellsstreetWanderer]

That shirt would outsell Kobe if it were available

[rocket surgeon]

That shirt would outsell Kobe if it were available

put kobe's name on the back

[MU82]

where can i get my shirt?  i can already hear the criticism-white supremacist, arian nation, racist.  i can however look past that because the shirt doesn't offend me and i know i am not a racist.  i wouldn't exactly wear it, walking down martin luther king blvd though.

You do know that the shirt is making fun of whites who think it's OK to use racist names and symbols for sports teams, right?

Please tell me you know that.

Also, if you read the article, you'd know where you could get the shirt. There's even a link. Although the article says the site crashed because so many people wanted them.

[rocket surgeon]

You do know that the shirt is making fun of whites who think it's OK to use racist names and symbols for sports teams, right?

Please tell me you know that.

Also, if you read the article, you'd know where you could get the shirt. There's even a link. Although the article says the site crashed because so many people wanted them.

absolutely, yes i know it is supposed to be making fun of whites, but because i, and i am sure many others feel we are above that.  i am humble enough to say and join in their attempts to demean my people. it doesn't do any of that for me.  don't they teah that class now in schools?  what one is supposed to be offended by?

so now it's only whites who think names like indians, redskins, irish, brewers, yankees, et.al are demeaning.  i choose to look at them as triumphant types, warriors if you will for their sport.  same for my caucasians-i'm just p1ssed off the shirt doesn't say FIGHTING CAUCASIANS.  next, we need to think of something like the tomahawk chop they use in atlanta and florida state without issues 

[ChicosBailBonds]

ESPN is OK with "Redskins," but not so much "Caucasians."

http://awfulannouncing.com/2016/espn-told-bomani-jones-to-cover-up-caucasians-t-shirt.html

Redskins is a name of honor, supported by the majority Native Americans.  Thus the difference.

Personally, I thought the Caucasians shirt was funny.  Of course, I couldn't wear that shirt....the irony.   

[jsglow]

Unanimous 8-0 on the key part of the ruling.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-rejecting-trademarks-that-disparage-others-violates-the-first-amendment/2017/06/19/26a33ffa-23b3-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html?utm_term=.b1689a154509

[rocket surgeon]

Unanimous 8-0 on the key part of the ruling.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-rejecting-trademarks-that-disparage-others-violates-the-first-amendment/2017/06/19/26a33ffa-23b3-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html?utm_term=.b1689a154509

Just had a conversation with native am out here in vegas who is a huge redskin fan. He said there are very few of them offended including himself but seems like mostly white people who are trying to act like they are sympathetic and are getting in the way of them. They are slowly losing their heritage and legacies by the very people that put them where they are now

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

Unanimous 8-0 on the key part of the ruling.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-rejecting-trademarks-that-disparage-others-violates-the-first-amendment/2017/06/19/26a33ffa-23b3-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html?utm_term=.b1689a154509

I think the intent here is to post the relevant ruling that impacts the systems/methods by which a govt agency tried to restrict speech (per the ruling) or prevent offense (per others opinion).

I think it is good and healthy case for the justices to take on and show a unanimous front...you may not like what is being said but there isn't a right to restrict it through the trademark office.  Seems fair.

[mu03eng]

I think the intent here is to post the relevant ruling that impacts the systems/methods by which a govt agency tried to restrict speech (per the ruling) or prevent offense (per others opinion).

I think it is good and healthy case for the justices to take on and show a unanimous front...you may not like what is being said but there isn't a right to restrict it through the trademark office.  Seems fair.

Regardless of you opinion on the offensive nature of something like Washington's nickname, this ruling is important in a larger context. Basically, this ruling says that just because "speech" goes through a government process the government can't decide whether the speech is acceptable or not. All speech as "valid" within the government context.

This is a good thing ultimately, no good can come from government managing speech, no matter how benign or for the "greater" good.

[#UnleashSean]

Just had a conversation with native am out here in vegas who is a huge redskin fan. He said there are very few of them offended including himself but seems like mostly white people who are trying to act like they are sympathetic and are getting in the way of them. They are slowly losing their heritage and legacies by the very people that put them where they are now

It's called pseudo independence

[Eldon]

Regardless of you opinion on the offensive nature of something like Washington's nickname, this ruling is important in a larger context. Basically, this ruling says that just because "speech" goes through a government process the government can't decide whether the speech is acceptable or not. All speech as "valid" within the government context.

This is a good thing ultimately, no good can come from government managing speech, no matter how benign or for the "greater" good.

+1

It is especially refreshing (comforting?) to see that the ruling was unanimous.  Score one for the political independence of SCOTUS.

[real chili 83]

A related topic.....maybe?

States censoring content on license plates

[B. McBannerson]

Correct decision by the court.

[Babybluejeans]

Correct decision by the court.

Just talked to a friend who's a very important person on the U.S. Supreme Court. The justices are thrilled you've approved. 

[mu03eng]

Just talked to a friend who's a very important person on the U.S. Supreme Court. The justices are thrilled you've approved.

I'm the source

[mu03eng]

A related topic.....maybe?

States censoring content on license plates

If there was any value in suing over content on license plates, it would 100% be ruled unconstitutional.

[Pakuni]

If there was any value in suing over content on license plates, it would 100% be ruled unconstitutional.

It's been challenged and ruled constitutional.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/06/18/415462597/high-court-rules-specialty-license-plates-constitute-government-speech

http://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2015/05/court-rules-restrictions-on-vanity-plates-constitutional-022377

[B. McBannerson]

Just talked to a friend who's a very important person on the U.S. Supreme Court. The justices are thrilled you've approved.

Thank you, though not sure why you decided to load up on me when others said they thought the ruling was just.  As Americans we should all be happy when justice is properly served and the rule of law upheld.  We do not need the US Gov't dictating what is and isn't offensive.  There is no one person or body that can do that properly. What one finds offensive, someone else doesn't. Proper ruling. 8-0. 

[warriorchick]

If there was any value in suing over content on license plates, it would 100% be ruled unconstitutional.

I didn't read the decisions posted after your comment, but I bet I can guess:

License plates are a method of identifying vehicles, not a form of speech, and just because the Secretary of State is granting you some leeway in regards to choosing which letters and numbers are used to identify your car, it doesn't mean that they are required to let you use whatever combo you want.

What if Jimmy Butler decided that instead of having "21" as his uniform number, he wanted it to be "JFB69"?  Is denying that a freedom of speech violation?

[mu03eng]

It's been challenged and ruled constitutional.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/06/18/415462597/high-court-rules-specialty-license-plates-constitute-government-speech

http://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2015/05/court-rules-restrictions-on-vanity-plates-constitutional-022377

Not to pick nits, but only one of those is a supreme court decision and that one was a decision around the state and an organization with a design. Not a private citizen choosing to select letters/numbers that created something offensive. Apples and oranges to the trademark decision around Washington's nickname.