[ekanes]

While not an answer to your specific question, this popped into my head as being similar in tone to what I think you're asking about.

https://reason.com/2024/10/17/british-man-convicted-of-crimi...

(An example of something that might be perceived by some as a judicial over-reaction based on perceived offensiveness to others.)

[dudefeliciano]

From what I understand the Public Spaces Protection Order is a law that exists exactly for this reason, how would this be a judicial overreaction?

Seems similar to the German law that makes it illegal to wear politcal symbols or talk politics outside of polling places. There is an undefined "buffer zone" outside of the voting location where, if you display political symbols, you will be arrested. This is a limitation of freedom of expression, but IMHO it makes total sense.

[gizmo]

Germany is indeed like the UK in that it also does not believe in basic free speech protections. These anti-speech laws don't produce much domestic outrage because the people of Europe just like their politicians don't believe free speech is important. They believe anti-speech laws "make total sense". In many European countries you get visited by the police if you post the wrong kind of memes. You get arrested if you wave a Palestinian flag. Insulting a politician or police officer has been criminalized. These things all have a chilling effect on free expression.

The US has much stronger free speech protections than Europe. (At least for now.)

[yostrovs]

The man in the linked article did not display any signs or symbols, did not engage in speech, and did not "express" himself. If standing solemn is an arrestable offense, then anyone doing anything is subject to arrest. The police may think fascist thoughts are running through any random person's mind at this very moment.