I feel like our institutions are being populated by people who just want to destroy them instead of improving them or even debating their worth.
We have intolerant groups on both sides of many issues. Are we going to censor all of them?
> We have intolerant groups on both sides of many issues. Are we going to censor all of them?
Step one on the SPLC trail.
Quoting from it:
It's hard to see this as anything other than a cowardly retreat from a full-throated defense of the First Amendment. Moving forward, when deciding whether to take a free speech case, the organization will consider "factors such as the (present and historical) context of the proposed speech; the potential effect on marginalized communities; the extent to which the speech may assist in advancing the goals of white supremacists or others whose views are contrary to our values; and the structural and power inequalities in the community in which the speech will occur."
The memo also makes clear that the ACLU has zero interest in defending First Amendment rights in conjunction with Second Amendment rights. If controversial speakers intend to carry weapons, the ACLU "will generally not represent them."
In fact, the only thing I really see here is them saying that a lot of factors go into deciding which cases they can take, including the fact that they can't take all the cases they want to.
Without something more than this, I think the title is clickbait, if not outright wrong.