Jonathan Turley writes for USA Today about the danger leading Democrats pose to Americans’ First Amendment protections.
In the vice presidential debate Tuesday, Monnesota Gov. Tim Walz pulled the fire alarm.His opponent, Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, cited the massive system of censorship supported by Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate.
Walz proceeded to quote the line from a 1919 case in which Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said you do not have the right to falsely yell fire in a crowded theater.
It is the favorite mantra of the anti-free speech movement. It also is fundamentally wrong.
In my book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech In an Age of Rage,” I discuss the justice’s line from his opinion in Schenck v. United States. Holmes wrote, “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.”
As I discuss in the book, the line was largely lifted from a brief in an earlier free speech case. It has since become the rationale for politicians and pundits seeking to curtail free speech in America. …
… In the vice presidential debate, Walz showed that he and other Democratic leaders most certainly do need a class in First Amendment law. …
… [T]he Biden-Harris administration has proved to be the most anti-free speech administration in two centuries. You have to go back to John Adams’ administration to find the equal of this administration.
Harris has been an outspoken champion of censorship in an administration that supports targeting disinformation, misinformation and “malinformation.” That last category was defined by the Biden administration as information “based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.”
In the debate, Walz also returned to his favorite dismissal of censorship objections by saying that it is all just inflammatory rhetoric.
