Instead of characterizing racist and sexist hate speech as “just speech,” courts and legislatures need to . . . allow the restriction of hate speech. . . . Many readers will find this line of thinking repellent. They will insist that protecting hate speech is . . . central to our founding principles. . . . But these free-speech absolutists must at least acknowledge two facts. First, the right to speak already is far from absolute. Second, they are asking disadvantaged members of our society to shoulder a heavy burden with serious consequences.

–“The Case for Restricting Hate Speech,”

Laura Beth Nielsen

How does the writer address the counterargument? Check all that apply.

She offers a better solution.

She points out a contradiction.

She explains its negative impact.

She expresses her disgust directly.

She admits that it is correct.
B, C