Tag: freedom of the press

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.

a visit to a congressional office (door)

I had wanted to write last week about political developments, including the resignation of DT’s national security adviser, the failure of Republican leaders in Congress to step up to investigate the relationship between DT’s campaign/administration and Russia, the confirmation of Scott Pruitt as EPA chief, and DT’s bizarre press conference and continued attacks on the free press, which should be guaranteed by the US Constitution.

I couldn’t muster the energy to do it.

This morning, I attended a monthly meeting of the Catholic Peace Community, where we discussed a community health care town hall being held this evening. Our member of Congress has been invited to attend, but there has been no indication that she will do so.

She is a Tea Party Republican and wants to repeal the Affordable Care Act. I had already written to her about the ACA, asking that it be retained and improved, not repealed. Her reply to my letter was somewhat disingenuous, faulting the ACA for not solving problems that it was not designed to solve in the first place.  She also did not give concrete ideas on how a replacement plan would work.

Before the meeting, I had seen a post on Facebook about the town hall which gave the location of her new local office, which I shared with the people at the meeting. After we finished, I proceeded downtown to the new office, to ask that the Representative attend the town hall and to share my further thoughts on health care.

It was a bit difficult to locate the office. There was no listing on the directory, no arrow pointing down the appropriate hallway, and no sign on the door, although I knew it was the right place because there was a Congressional seal on the wall beyond the glass door.

The lights were on, but the door was locked.

Not having any idea how long it would be before someone returned and not wanting to waste a visit, I found a bench, pulled out some paper from my pocketbook, and composed a several-paragraph-long note.

I walked back to the office and slipped my note under the still-locked door.

When I returned home, there was a phone message from one of the staff members, so at least I know that my message was received.

Whether it, along with the opinions of many, many others in our district, has any impact on her Congressional votes remains to be seen.