Thankfully, Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling has solemnly sworn that she is up to no good. As the law went into effect, Rowling made a now-viral series of posts on X that took direct aim at the vague, speech-restricting law.
The new act makes it a crime to act or speak in a way that is threatening or abusive with the intent to “stir up hatred” on account of a person or group’s age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, or gender identity. Other portions of the law make it illegal to act or speak in a way that is “likely” to stir up hatred on the basis of race, skin color, nationality, or ethnicity.
But as anyone who has studied hate speech laws could predict, criminalizing “hate speech” inevitably affects even those it was supposed to protect. Since the law has come into effect, by far, the most reported person has actually been First Minister Humza Yousaf, mostly for a parliamentary speech he gave in June 2020 in which he decried the number of white people in positions of power in Scotland. What to some is a righteous and impassioned speech about racial injustice is, to others, a racist speech that is likely to stir up hatred.
And this turnabout play isn’t surprising in the least. The first person prosecuted under the British Race Relations Act of 1965, which was designed to protect minority groups, was a black man. France’s “Lellouche” law was passed in 2004 to stop growing antisemitism and Islamophobia. But it has repeatedly been used to silence those who criticize the Israeli government and call for boycotting Israeli goods. Canadian hate speech laws have resulted in the seizure of the book Black Looks: Race and Representation by a feminist and African American scholar at Oberlin College.