@LouisIngenthron i don’t think this is a rule you can apply to publics, who have free speech rights. but people in institutional positions of power can be legally bound in what they say while in their roles (and people who aspire to those positions can be bound by strong norms). 1/

@LouisIngenthron so Pence can’t arrest protesters for “dehumanizing language”. that’s easy. a harder question is could anti-abortion activists slippery-slope support for abortion rights into proscribed dehumanization, so it’d effectively become illegal for political figures to support thise rights. 2/

@LouisIngenthron i think that’s a real concern, but not necessary fatal. every rule we define demands lines be drawn, and there is always risk that advocates will push the lines where initial framers don’t mean them to go. that process, drawing, defending, and deciding after all to let shift lines is much of what our court system struggles with everyday. i’m not sure this set of proscriptions of official (and only official) speech would be slipperier than lots of other lines we draw. /fin