The decision was made two months ago, but I think the written opinion has just become available, as GW v. An Immigration Officer. Note that the decision rests in considerable measure on internal European Union regulations having to do with freedom of movement among European states:
As a result of the 2006 Regulations, introduced by the present government, a Dutchman has almost the same right to visit London as a Yorkshireman has; and as a result of the Human Rights Act 1998, a Dutchman has the same right of freedom of expression as a Yorkshireman has.
The tribunal’s interesting discussion of freedom of expression, and of the insufficiency of the government’s threat-of-disturbance rationales, has to be understood against that backdrop.
(Note also, for whatever it’s worth, that the First Amendment, as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, allows the U.S. government broad authority to exclude visiting aliens based on the content and viewpoint of their speech, even if the speech is constitutionally protected. I express no opinion here about whether that constitutional rule is right or wrong; I just wanted to preclude arguments that the initial decision in this case was somehow a sign of how the UK provides substantially lesser free speech protections than the US — that’s true in some instances, but not in this one.)
pireader says:
Professor Volokh — U.S. government [has] broad authority to exclude visiting aliens based on the content and viewpoint of their speech, even if the speech is constitutionally protected
But New York no longer has the authority to exclude an Ohioan, or vice versa. Like New York, the UK is now part of a broader union that guarantees its citizens’ freedom of speech, and of intra-union travel.
Kinda cool, really. Even when it benefits a dubious case like Geert Wilders.
Quote
December 16, 2009, 2:49 pmDoc99 says:
I wonder if the UK Court Decision has implications for the UK’s exclusion of talk show host Michael Savage?
Quote
December 16, 2009, 2:55 pmtroll_dc2 says:
Michael Savage is not a citizen of a European Union country. So he can be excluded “just because.”
Quote
December 16, 2009, 3:18 pmADF Alliance Alert » UK Decision Concluding that Dutch MP Geert Wilders (a Harsh Critic of Islam) was Wrongly Excluded from the UK says:
[...] Volokh writes at the Volokh Conspiracy: “The decision was made two months ago, but I think the written opinion has just become [...]
Dr. Caligari says:
In the 1980s the US denied entry to George Woodcock. Woodcock, a Canadian, was denied entry because he was an anarchist. He was also a pacifist, in his 70s, and had no criminal record of any kind. He was also one of the most distinguished writers in Canada. This didn’t get a lot of attention at the time, but I was aware of it and every time Reagan said something about how free we were I thought of Woodcock being turned back at the border. To me, this is one of the most stupid things the Federal Government has done in my lifetime.
GW’s Wikipedia article (which doesn’t mention his exclusion from the US) is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Woodcock
A long interview with GW from shortly before his death in 1994, which touches on his exclusion from the US, is here:
http://www.georgewoodcock.com/georgewoodcock3.html
Fianally, here is GW’s bibliography. I admit I’m inclined to admire someone who writes a really large number of books on a variety of subjects. GW maybe wasn’t Isaac Asimov’s equal in this, but he wasn’t too far behind:
http://www.georgewoodcock.com/bibliography.html
Hell, this guy was writing too much to make any trouble. It’s a wonder he could have even found time to come to the US.
Quote
December 16, 2009, 7:26 pmMartinned says:
European Law is a wonderful thing. That said, it is essential not to overlook the “almost” qualifier in the quote. In the landmark Van Duyn case, for example, the Brits were allowed to ban a Dutchwoman on the grounds that she was a Scientologist.
(Although one can wonder to what extent that 1974 case is still good law. In subsequent free movement of goods cases, the ECJ has generally demanded that goods can only be banned from being imported if they are banned domestically as well. In Van Duyn, British citizens were (and are) not forbidden from joining the “church” of Scientology.)
Quote
December 16, 2009, 7:48 pmUK Decision Concluding that Dutch MP Geert Wilders (a Harsh Critic of Islam) was Wrongly Excluded from the UK | Liberal Whoppers says:
[...] the rest here: UK Decision Concluding that Dutch MP Geert Wilders (a Harsh Critic of Islam) was Wrongly Excluded fr... Share this [...]
Ricardo says:
It is good to see the UK at least partially smacked down for this. In the past, it has engaged in a bit of grandstanding by making public its immigration blacklist so that the world could see all the people the UK was excluding in all its righteous indignation for voicing “offensive” views. Michael “Savage” was only one of several foreigners the UK seems to have singled out for the purposes of grandstanding.
Naturally, the U.S. is hardly innocent in this area as well. But a decision saying the UK may not arbitrarily exclude EU nationals because some government minister doesn’t like what they have to say ought to pare down the blacklist a bit.
Quote
December 17, 2009, 12:25 amDat Nouc says:
Also interesting in light of the fact that UK government routinely made ‘exclusion orders’ against members of Irish paramilitary organisations into the mid 1990s effectively barring it’s own citizens in Northern Ireland from entry to the UK ‘mainland’ of Great Britain. I wonder if any of these exclusion orders are still current?
Entering the UK is not always a good idea for people who hold ‘strong views’ as General Pinoche, Robert Mugabe and a few other people have found out.
Personally, I think that the ruling was wrong — there are several strong arguments for excluding Yorkshiremen from the UK which would enjoy popular support among many UK citizens:-) Have any of you ever been to Sheffield?
Quote
December 17, 2009, 11:02 amMartinned says:
Has it really only just become available? The easier version of the file is here, on bailii, but I’m not sure how long it’s already been there.
Quote
December 17, 2009, 11:03 amMartinned says:
@Dat Nouc: I’m not sure if I would describe the problem with Pinochet as concerning his “strong views”.
Quote
December 17, 2009, 1:12 pmThe Weekly Wilders Round-Up « Defend Geert Wilders says:
[...] Volokh Conspiracy – UK Decision Concluding that Dutch MP Geert Wilders (a Harsh Critic of Islam) was Wrongly Excluded fr...: The decision was made two months ago, but I think the written opinion has just become available, [...]