Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/31167
Title: Regulating Cyber Racism in the United States: Legal and Non-Legal Responses from a Comparative Perspective
Contributor(s): Chen, Ying  (author)orcid 
Publication Date: 2021
Open Access: Yes
Handle Link: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/31167
Open Access Link: https://wilj.law.wisc.edu/issues-archive/volume-38-issue-3/Open Access Link
Abstract: 

The global outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020 has unleashed virulent xenophobia and a tide of racial hatred. There have been increasing reports of racist hostility in the digital environment. Former President Trump's racist remarks on social media platforms allowed these divides to resurface in the United States. Racial hostility in the virtual world has already fostered aggressive behavior in the offline world. In some cases, it has crossed the line from online hate speech to real-world hate crime. Cyber racism creates new challenges for the American legal system.

This research investigates the possibility of regulating cyber racism in the United States from a comparative perspective. Part I provides background information and introduces the structure of the research. Part II analyzes the international legal framework governing racial discrimination and suggests that due to the lack of enforcement power, the world cannot rely upon the international legal system for racial justice. Instead, individual countries must take responsibility for fighting racism. Part III examines cyber racism in the United States from two aspects: (1) the urgent need to address cyber racism, and (2) the constitutional challenges under current First Amendment jurisprudence. Part IV proposes a multi-faceted approach that encompasses both legal and non-legal responses to combat cyber racism in the United States. In this Part, the practices of some of the world's most democratic countries, namely, France and Australia, are assessed from a comparative perspective. In the legal context, the French and Australian models provide persuasive authority for the United States Supreme Court to impose more restrictions on racist speech while interpreting the First Amendment. This Article also suggests that the Australian scrutiny tests strike a better balance between the right of free speech and the right to freedom from racism than equivalent U.S. tests. Therefore, the Australian system could provide a great reference for the United States Supreme Court as it seeks to solve problems in applying the Brandenburg test. Furthermore, a well-designed conciliation process also provides an effective avenue for aggrieved parties to seek racial justice. In the non-legal context, increased responsibility for Internet intermediaries and anti-racism education are crucial in combating cyber racism. Part V concludes the research by re-emphasizing the importance of regulating cyber racism in the United States. It is hoped that the solutions proposed in this research can strengthen the arsenal of tools available to prevent cyber racism.

Publication Type: Journal Article
Source of Publication: Wisconsin International Law Journal, 38(3), p. 477-524
Publisher: University of Wisconsin at Madison, Law School
Place of Publication: United States of America
ISSN: 0743-7951
Fields of Research (FoR) 2020: 480302 Comparative law
480702 Constitutional law
480307 International humanitarian and human rights law
Socio-Economic Objective (SEO) 2020: 230405 Law reform
230499 Justice and the law not elsewhere classified
239999 Other law, politics and community services not elsewhere classified
Peer Reviewed: Yes
HERDC Category Description: C1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journal
Appears in Collections:Journal Article
School of Law

Files in This Item:
1 files
File SizeFormat 
Show full item record

Page view(s)

1,548
checked on Oct 8, 2023
Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.