Hate speech continues to occupy an uncanny space between politics and law. The urgency of the demand for protection from law against the attacks of hatred is getting more acute alongside the anxiety of getting lost in the conservative labyrinths of law. This dilemma and ambigiousness itself is enough to rethink the hate speech outside the domain of law into which it is rapidly dragged. In this article we aim to deepen this debate with reference to Judith Butler’s thought that bring a strong criticism to the dominant approaches to hate speech and point to the disadvanteges of policies that position the state/law as the main agent. We will review Butler’s arguments through the notions of linguistic vulnerability, the sovereign position attributed to the spaker and performative politics. Along with Butler we will emphasize the importance of agency that is produced within the creative and subversive performative politics that resist linguistic vulnerability.