To follow up on this, it's not merely that the California court's decision was directed entirely at state actors, and had no bearing on the actions of private churches at all. It's that the whole category of "hate speech," as it pertains to American law, doesn't exist. The state cannot restrict speech solely based in its content, no matter how hateful or potentially dangerous; this has been well-settled federal law for nearly 40 years. (The separate category of hate crimes, which deal with the intent of the perpetrators of violent crimes -- which is always relevant -- as opposed to their beliefs per se is again of no relevance to Warren's claims.) This is recognized by critics of the libertarian American approach as well as those (like me) who generally favor it.
Whatever the decision Prop 8 sought to overturn had said, therefore, it simply could not have made any action by a church criminal, and anybody who actually knew anything about American politics and constitutional law would know that. Whether Warren himself is fully immersed in a world of paranoid conservative fantasia or is simply cynically pandering to the ignorant paranoia of his audience I can't say, but either way it doesn't speak well of him.
--Scott Lemieux
