Just recently, there was a case in Rochester, Minnesota, that stemmed from an April 28, 2025, incident where a woman named Shiloh Hendrix used racial slurs towards an 8-year-old Somali child and his father. The incident began when the Somali boy went and took an applesauce container from the baby bag of Ms. Hendrix, who was at the park with her child. The Somali boy was identified by the father as being autistic. Ms. Hendrix, who is white, used the racial slur towards the child and the father. She was charged with two counts of disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor. The trial ended with a split decision convicting her of one count of disorderly conduct, referring to her using the racial slur towards the father. She was fined $1,000, must serve 200 hours of community service, and the 90-day jail sentence was stayed by the judge.

Of course, this became an issue of race. One can understand that. But perhaps we should look at this case in other aspects that could have long-term ramifications for the First Amendment’s free speech clause.

First of all, would this have gotten any attention if Ms. Hendrix were Black? I know that the NAACP was involved in this case, but where have they been all these years when Black rap artists were using the same racial slurs, and worse, referring to women in degrading terms?

I, for one, do not like the selective outrage aspect of this case. As well, where was the NAACP and others when a white Texas Democratic Party county chairman referred to Black U.S. Senator Tim Scott as an “Oreo”? Is that not also a racial slur? Heck, I have been called the same, along with “Uncle Tom” and the most inventive moniker to date, “White Man’s Porch Monkey.” During my congressional reelection campaign in 2012, my opponent, Patrick Murphy, had ads run against me depicting me with a gold tooth and punching white women. Kinda racist and disparaging, ya think? Yet nothing was said by the NAACP.

If we start going down the rabbit hole of prosecuting people for using stupid words, we are going to be in a world of hurt. But also, who are the ones who will make the decision on what speech is criminal, offensive, and worthy of punishment? What Ms. Hendrix said is truly offensive, and I despise that word, a word that I have been called, and certainly my parents were called. However, to charge her with disorderly conduct when she directed her stupid comments towards other individuals is stretching the definition of a crime, and it certainly can serve to undermine free speech. If there is one thing that the law cannot do, it is police individual stupidity. Now, if Ms. Hendrix was in a workplace and used that racial slur, absolutely, I would understand the employer firing her. She would be guilty of violating EO/EEOC rules and regulations and also of contributing to a hostile work environment.

Ms. Hendrix was clearly socially wrong in her use of a racial slur, as was her follow-on video that claimed, “If someone acts like one, I will call them one,” or something to that effect. But her actions are hardly what I would call criminal. Then again, the Marxist left loves to create victims, and, for some reason, the members of the Somali community, and some others, appear to have a Klingon cloaking device precluding them from any perceived attacks. I am sorry that the little 8-year-old Somali child suffers from autism. It is also a parent’s responsibility to protect their child, especially one who has said issue. The father in this case should have done a better job monitoring the actions and movements of his son. I understand that he may not comprehend boundaries. Heck, adults have issues comprehending boundaries.

The Constitution of the United States is a restrictive document, creating boundaries for the federal government. These same laws, enumerated powers, and guidelines are often disregarded, yet with no consequences or ramifications for those in offense. Freedom of speech is a protected right of the individual in our first ten amendments to the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights. There is no descriptive adjective before the word “speech.” If we start allowing individuals to create descriptive adjectives, we will soon find ourselves not having freedom of speech. We will have freedom of “accepted” speech. And that was something we saw during the Biden administration when there was an attempt to establish a “Disinformation Governance Board.” This insidious idea was similar to the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell’s book 1984.

I do not like anyone using racial slurs, but, as Rahm Emanuel once quipped, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” The case of Shiloh Hendrix, who will soon be forgotten in her 30 minutes of fame, is once again one where the Marxist left and their plantation gatekeepers in the NAACP seek to leverage an innocuous, dumb incident for political purposes. In the end, it will lead to exactly what the Democratic Socialists of America desire: a controlled population and the decimation of our Constitution.

Steadfast and Loyal.

Republished from ACRU Action Fund.