Source

Perceived by Heinrichsgeist: 2025. Quotations on this page refer to this source, unless otherwise indicated (citation purpose: illustrative emphasis of selected passages).

Interesting

Mathias Hong’s summary in the subtitle

Freedom of opinion also fundamentally applies to the “enemies of freedom”. However, if the existing limits of freedom of expression are observed, the Federal Constitutional Court’s case law on this fundamental right is also sustainable in the age of digital expression streams.

further down

In a nutshell: A law is not a general law, but special law against certain opinions if it not only ties in with opinion content, but even discriminates against certain political, religious or ideological viewpoints (for example: only politically “right-wing”, but not “left-wing”). It is not just any content-based discrimination, but only viewpoint-based discrimination that constitutes a prohibited special right. This distinction shows a clear comparative legal relationship to the distinction between content discrimination and viewpoint discrimination in the United States. The U.S. Supreme Court also sees viewpoint discrimination as the cardinal offence against freedom of expression.

further down

“Restrict the guarantee of human dignity!” or “Reintroduce the death penalty!” are therefore demands that are diametrically opposed to the content of the Basic Law. However, the Basic Law also recognises the right to express them unhindered and relies on the power of intellectual debate “as the most effective weapon against the spread of totalitarian and inhuman ideologies”.