Brokers collide with nar -speech code

In a recent blog post he reported that Texas legislators a state ban of the Speech code – Legislation that would also prevent other trade associations from implementing comparable rules of conduct.

Texas SB 2713Introduced by Mayes Middleton (R), explicitly prohibits every trade association of “refusing access, membership or participation on the basis of various factors, including race, color, religion, gender, disability, family origin or a person exercising freedom of expression or meeting.”

If adopted, the bill will take effect on 1 September.

“When Nar passed the speech code for the first time, I wrote a long post in which an alternative was recommended,” Hahn wrote Wednesday. “Part of it is because I am an absolutist of free speech.

“But the other part, at least in 2020, was that I could see where things would go and I wanted to keep what the industry had built up for more than a hundred years.”

Conversely, Ryan Hainlin, founder and former CEO of the LGBTQ+ Real Estate Alliancewrote one refutation To Hahn’s push against the speech code.

“The first amendment was never intended as a bone weapon,” he said. “It protects speech against government censorship – not by consequence, not against responsibility, and certainly not of moral control. Like any freedom ends the expression where the safety of another begins.”

Historical context and implementation

The speech code of Nar was introduced in 2020 with provisions aimed at preventing brokers from exercising discriminatory speech, even outside their professional activities.

“Ryan talks about freedom of expression, but justice is more important,” said Hahn. “No, on the contrary, without freedom of expression, there is no justice. There can be no justice without freedom of expression and conscience.

“Texas is about to kill Nar’s speech code. Ryan is sad, as he should be, because his control -freak agenda can no longer work. On the other hand, I am ready to throw a party for the victory of freedom, for the victory of free speech and the freedom of conscience.”

Hainlin emphasized the history of industry.

“For decades, the National Association of Realtors approved racial restrictive covenants,” he said. “Nar fought to keep Redlineing. Only in 1972 – eight years after the Civil Rights Act – that Nar updated his own ethical code to acknowledge that discrimination was wrong.

“Today, those inheritances are still with us. Black Americans are left behind nearly 30 points behind white Americans in the homeowner. LGBTQ+ people are confronted with a 16-point gap compared to the general population. And almost a third of the Queer Americans report direct housing discrimination or bias.”

Legal context

Legal opinion generally claims that professional codes of conduct, such as the speech code of Nar, do not violate the first amendment.

The first amendment limits the censorship of the government, not the actions of private organizations, according to the American Supreme Court.

In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)The court ruled that the speech can only be limited if the imminent legless action is imposing. However, this standard applies to government actions – not private associations that enforce ethical standards.

Further, in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)The Court acknowledged that certain speech categories, such as ‘vegal words’, are not protected under the first amendment – to support the idea that organizations can impose restrictions on certain behavior.

Balancing individual rights and community standards

Hahn argues that the speech code of Nar exceeds a rule by comparing controversial speech with actual damage.

“Words are not violence. Violence is violence,” he holds full. “Aircraft that plunge into buildings and thousands of people who burn dead is violence. It appears that the reality exists.

“There is a similar reality as being human. There are absolutely values. The Bill of Rights does not admit any rights; it only acknowledges the reality of them as an inherent to all people. Free expression and freedom of association, right of self-defense, the right to be free of search and seizure of the Stichting Dish were not given by the government.”

Hainlin said that brokers, such as members of a profession, correspond to higher standards when they become members.

“Ethics codes are not just a good idea – they are expected,” he said. “They are not only encouraged by federal supervisors, but highly recommended by any credible independent supervision, board and compliance institution in the non -profit world. For 501 (C) (3), 501 (C) and 501 (C) (6) organizations – such as Nar and thousands of others is the standard.”