Question

ゲ　

星マークの付いている文（Are there limits beyond which offensive or hateful speech deserves to be suppressed by state power?）のところの訳（2枚目星マーク）が意訳なのか、どうしてこの訳になるのかわかりません。

| | Read the PaSsage and answer the questions below.
In the summer of 1990, a group of teenagers in the city of St Paul, Minnesota, burned a cross in front of the house of an African-American

family. The teenagers were arrested and charged with violating a St. Paul law called the “Bias-motivated Crime Ordinance.” The law made
which one knows or has reasonable grounds to know arouses anger, alarm or

ツ

it iegal to place “on public or private property a symbol .…
resentment in others on the basis of race, color, creed, religion or gender.” The teenagers challenged the legal basis of their arrest。 and in 1992、

the US Supreme Court declared the St. Paul aw an unconstitutional violation of freedom of speech. A European court would almost certainly
have decided the case differently. Domestic national courts in Europe, as well as the European Court of Human Rights, are far more likely than
their American counterparts to | 16 | “extreme speech"- speech that offends personal dignity on the basis of factors such as race ethnicity。
religion and sexual orientation.  HateG crime prohibitions are familiar throughout Europe - laws that would not stand a chance of being accepted
as constitutional in the United States. The differences between American and European approaches to the law raise pressing questions about the
nature and limits of expressive freedom in democratic nations. What role, if any, should the law play in democracies in policing speech?
there imits beyond which offensive or hateful speech deserves to be suppressed by state power? Do efforts to punish extreme speech produce a

 

 

 

 

healthier democracy?
② One way to determine the extent to which free speech should be guaranteed would be to take into consideration the cultural and historical

2    ン 。 に

すれば, それはどんな役割だろう ? 国家権カが作克的あ
るいは憎悪に満ちた言論を, こと以上になると抑制すると
いう 限度はあるのだろうか。 酸端な理論を視する試みは
より健全な民主主義を生むのだろうか。
( 言革の自由を保証すべき 程度を決める1つの方法は, 文
* 化的および歴史的状況を考慮に入れることである。 一部の
法学者たちは, ヨーロッパとアメリカのこのような倍いを
、 それぞれの見方が違う 理由に挙げる。 例えば「ドイツ喜法

に 生ーニー ーー  ーーンーテーー ーーテー

Answer 1

Xx_Saskia_xX

分解して直訳を付けます。

Are there あるのだろうか
limits 限度
beyond ここ以上になると
which offensive or hateful speech侮辱的あるいは憎悪に満ちた言論を
deserves to be suppressed 抑制するという
by state power 国家権力によって

意訳によって、deservesに直接対応する語が、はっきりわかる形になっていません。