That's not the point.
Hate speech was given a green light by the supreme court.
I have little issue with that or even the lyrics. NWA was pushing boundaries.
NDE stated though "We already limit violent kinds of speech."
I would think that line would fall into the "violent " category don't you think?
Under the case law interpreting the boundaries of free speech under the First Amendment, speech that merely advocates violence or criminal activity is not unlawful. That rule was established in Bradenburg v. Ohio, where the Supreme Court reversed the criminal convictions of members of a Ku Klux Klan group because their statements at a rally did not express an immediate or imminent threat to do violence. Thus, most rap lyrics, while repugnant, are not unlawful. On the other hand, speech that advocates imminent lawless action does not receive First Amendment protection. Similarly, speech made for the principal purpose of creating panic, e.g., falsely shouting "fire" in a theater, is not protected free speech. The reality is that the First Amendment protects almost all speech, however abhorrent, repulsive or ill conceived it may be at times, and that is truly one of the great things about this country. Despite the disparate political views frequently expressed on this board, I expect that is one founding principal all of us share in common.