Tag: First Amendment

Freedom of Speech

Vote for Democracy #46

(Photo by Lucas Sankey on Unsplash)

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That is the text of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

The Attorney General, the Vice President, the President, the Chair of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and everyone else in the government would do well to re-read it and observe it.

The court system has ruled over and over that “hate speech” and flag burning are protected by the First Amendment and that press report are not subject to government censorship.

Yes, here we are with the Attorney General saying the administration would target hate speech. The Justice Department tried to re-characerize the remark as meaning they would target speech that incited violence, which can be illegal, but that was not what she had said or appeared to mean.

In the wake of Charlie Kirk’s murder, the administration wants to investigate anyone critical of Kirk or his views, even though they have no legal grounds to do so because people’s right to free speech is guaranteed against government interference by the First Amendment. For those of you not familiar with the structure of the US government, Congress makes the law, the executive branch executes the law, and the judicial branch judges if the laws are in accordance with the Constitution and other statutes.

Note that the freedom of speech right is in regard to government interference. Private entities aren’t bound to allow free speech. For example, if someone makes an uncivil or inflammatory comment on my blog which I then delete, I am not violating the First Amendment because I am not the government and have the right to control what happens on my platform. (For the record, while I encourage respectful debate here at Top of JC’s Mind, I have on a rare occasion removed comments for using foul language or for spreading disinformation.) There was an instance of a copy shop employee refusing to print a flyer regarding Kirk. While the business owner could choose to sanction or fire the employee, the government has no right to investigate on free speech grounds.

The administration upped the ante a few days ago when the FCC Chair publicly pressured ABC affiliates to stop airing comedian Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show because of a comment he had made regarding the right’s actions after Kirk’s murder, implying that not doing so would harm them in getting approvals and licenses from the FCC. This caused a couple of large media ownership groups to say they would suspend airing the show and ABC/Disney then suspending production. It’s unclear if the show will return or not. This situation does appear to violate the First Amendment because a government entity intervened to inhibit Kimmel’s free speech rights.

To make matters worse, President Trump is again threatening freedom of the press, as well as free speech, by saying that entire broadcast networks should be disbanded because they run stories that are critical of him. There is a real fear that media companies will continue to cave to pressure from Trump and his administration and stop broadcasting facts and opinions that run counter to Trump’s viewpoint.

While most Republicans have been either backing Trump or staying silent, a few were shaken enough about the concept of hate speech – or opposition speech – not being protected by free speech provisions that they are speaking out. I’m not sure if they are standing on principle or if they fear what might happen to them when Republicans are no longer in power, but it’s good to see some of them willing to oppose the Trump administration when it is acting against our Constitution.

I also appreciate that having some Republicans speaking out will reach people who only consume ultra-concservative media. Everyone needs to realize that there are threats to free speech and free press so that we can make moves to protect our First Amendment rights. Some people are boycotting companies like Disney that are curtailing free speech by bowing to pressure from the administration. Many are supporting independent journalism sources, such as PBS/NPR.

It’s important for all of us to speak up for our rights. I plan to continue doing that here and wherever I find myself. I also plan to be on the lookout for further attempts to erode our rights and silence dissenting voices. We have to be careful that the United States doesn’t have its media coopted in the way it was in Hungary.

We also need to be sure that we don’t fall into the administration’s trap of calling any opposing viewpoints “hate speech.” If I say that I think it’s wrong to deport people who are in the process of getting green cards or who have refugee or other protected status, that is protected free speech. It is not hate speech.

I do try to heed the call in my faith to love everyone.

I refuse to engage in hateful speech or behavior.

I wish everyone felt that way.

Vote for Democracy #4

(Photo by Lucas Sankey on Unsplash)

The United States is not a “Christian nation.”

In the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment makes clear that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” It is the first freedom listed in the ten amendments of the Bill of Rights, which was considered so vital that the states required it to be added before they would adopt the Constitution.

While some of the colonies had originally had an established religion, others, such as Rhode Island, had been founded explicitly without a government-sanctioned religion. At the time of the founding, the majority of United States residents were Christian, which is still true today, but the country was explicitly founded to be non-sectarian.

That’s why it’s so disturbing to me to see so many Republicans pushing the concept that the United States either is or should be a “Christian nation,” ignoring both the First Amendment and our history.

A particularly disturbing example of this is that this week, observed by the majority of Christian denominations as Holy Week leading to the celebration of Easter on Sunday, Donald Trump is selling the God Bless the USA bible, which includes the King James version of the Bible along with the US Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Pledge of Allegiance. Trump’s message is “Let’s Make America Pray Again.” He thinks every home should have a (this/his) Bible.

This flies in the face of the First Amendment, which is, one assumes, included in this volume.

As a United States citizen and a Roman Catholic Christian, I am appalled that Trump is raising money in this blatant attempt to appeal to “Christian nationalists,” who want the United States to become a Christian nation, most of whom intend it to be a white Christian nation.

No.

The United States is a pluralistic nation and that is one of its strengths. It has certainly been an imperfect union with egregious examples of discrimination, bigotry, and injustice over the centuries, but we are working to move in a direction closer to equality for all people. Favoring one religion over another in our government must not be allowed.

Our government is a secular one and must remain so, as the Founders and generations of Americans intended.

When we vote, we should keep this principle in mind and reject any candidate who thinks the US is or should be a “Christian nation.”

Catholicism and governance in the US

When I wrote this post on the immediate aftermath of the Dobbs decision in the US Supreme Court throwing all abortion rule-making back to the states, I alluded to the way the opinion followed Catholic teaching and my fears for what that would mean.

Of the nine justices on the current Supreme Court, seven were raised Catholic. (Justice Gorsuch was raised Catholic but is now an Episcopalian.) Of the seven, only Justice Sotomayor was nominated by a Democratic president; her views seem to be more mainstream among Catholics in the US.

The five Republican-appointed practicing Catholics (Justices Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Cavanaugh, and Barrett) and Justice Gorsuch are/were all either members of or closely affiliated with members of Opus Dei, a secretive, ultra-conservative group that rose to prominence in the fascist period in Spain. Leonard Leo, a board member of Opus Dei and, for many years, a powerful leader of the Federalist Society, was a supporter/promoter of all six Republican-nominated justices and is also known to have fostered relationships between conservative billionaires and various justices. Beyond the Dobbs ruling, there have been a number of Supreme Court decisions that seem to reflect the Opus Dei viewpoint more than Supreme Court precedent and mainstream Constitutional interpretation.

Sadly, many of the fears I had about the out-sized influence of conservative Catholic opinions about abortion have come to pass, in some states, aided and abetted by conservative, Catholic-raised governors, such as Greg Abbott of Texas and Ron DeSantis of Florida. In states where abortion is illegal or restricted to early weeks, women have hemorrhaged, developed sepsis, lost their ability to carry a child, or even died from lack of timely abortion care. There is currently a lawsuit in Texas by women who were denied abortion care in cases of pregnancy complication or fatal fetal conditions; these stories illustrate what happens when you force the conservative Catholic viewpoint that privileges the life of the unborn over the life of the mother on the public and medical providers. Indeed, in many of the states with restrictive abortion bans, medical providers trained in women’s/maternal health are leaving the state and medical schools and hospitals are having difficulty attracting students and providers to their programs because they can’t offer the full range of services to their patients. This is worsening already critical shortages of providers, especially in rural areas. When statistics become available, we may see a worsening of maternal morbidity/mortality and infant mortality rates, which are already much higher in the US than in most other countries with advanced medical systems.

The states with the most restrictive abortion laws are seeing some other impacts. Young people are sometimes refusing to consider going to school or taking jobs in states that restrict abortion, not only for fear of not being able to get care they need but also in recognition of inequality on the basis of sex. Lack of choice about where service members will be stationed is adding to recruiting problems for the armed services. Currently, Sen. Tuberville of Alabama is holding up all high-level military appointments in the Senate because the military policy is to pay for service members to travel out of state for reproductive care that is not provided in the state where service members and their families are stationed. (Note: Federal money is not used to fund elective abortion. This controversy is about funding travel/leave only.) I don’t think that it occurred to me that the Dobbs decision would impact our military readiness as a nation, but here we are.

We are also seeing proof that the overruling of Roe is not the end of the story. In some states, the legality of birth control is being challenged in the legislature. Many Republicans on the national level are proposing a national ban on abortion, even though the Dobbs decision said that the issue should be decided state by state. Voters in the midterm elections are weighing in on the side of abortion rights as articulated in Roe; it seems they may continue to do so in future elections.

I’m also afraid that this ultra-conservative Catholic viewpoint on the Supreme Court is feeding the larger problem of Christian nationalism. The United States is not a Christian nation; it is a pluralistic nation. The First Amendment of our Constitution tells us that our country shall not have an established religion.

The Federalist Society members are supposed to be originalists. You would think they would know that.

As an American, it is my right to make personal decisions based on my beliefs. The government does not have the right to impose a religious belief on me. It seems to me that this Opus Dei-influenced Supreme Court has crossed that line more than once. Whether a future Court overrules these decisions or Congress passes laws clarifying their intent remains to be seen.