Without free speech, America is nothing

We must stand up for the most fundamental right of all.

Photo by Pete Souza via Wikimedia Commons

“If the freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” — George Washington

“Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.” — Thomas Jefferson

“Why should freedom of speech and freedom of press be allowed? Why should a government…allow itself to be criticized? I would not allow opposition by lethal weapons. Ideas are much more fatal things than guns. Why should any man be allowed to…disseminate pernicious opinions calculated to embarrass the government?” — Vladimir Lenin

Donald Trump returned to power promising to restore freedom of speech in America. In his inaugural speech on January 20, he declared:

After years and years of illegal and unconstitutional federal efforts to restrict free expression, I also will sign an executive order to immediately stop all government censorship and bring back free speech to America.

And in February, JD Vance said:

Our own government encouraged private companies to silence people...Under Donald Trump's leadership, we may disagree with your views, but we will fight to defend your right to offer it in the public square.

And in a now-deleted tweet from 2019, Brendan Carr, whom Trump would later name to lead his FCC, offered similar sentiments:

Why were the MAGA folks talking so passionately about freedom of speech? Because for years, conservatives felt as if that freedom was under attack by the progressive movement, and later by the Biden administration.

Since the mid-2010s, progressives on social media had tried to ruin the reputation and careers of people who said things they considered racist, transphobic, or otherwise problematic. Social media platforms were successfully pressured to “deplatform” various figures on the right, including Donald Trump himself after the January 6th attacks. Some rightists were even cut off from bank accounts and other essential services.

Progressives argued that none of this was a violation of freedom of speech. They claimed that freedom of speech is entirely defined by the First Amendment, and involves only government restrictions on speech. If private companies took away your bank account or kicked you off of the country’s main social media platforms, that was merely social ostracism, not a violation of any freedom. Conservatives retorted that if private companies have the ability to make modern life unlivable for people whose speech they don’t like, that takes away their freedom of speech.

I agree with the conservatives on this one; government is not the only organization that has the power to restrict freedom. I thought the centrist liberals who signed the Harper’s Letter in support of free speech — and were pilloried by progressives for doing so — were pretty heroic.

Anyway, then came the Biden administration’s war on disinformation. The administration tried to pressure social media companies into taking down certain posts, and was eventually halted from doing this by the courts. Biden’s Department of Homeland Security created a “Disinformation Governance Board” that conservatives feared would become a propaganda ministry. (I side with the Biden administration on this latter example; having the government contradict things people say is not a violation of free speech.)

After years of this, conservatives and rightists started to think of themselves as the guardians of free speech, fighting back against a smothering progressive orthodoxy. For many, this belief was sincere. But for the Trump administration, it proved to be nothing more than a cheap slogan.

In the days since the assassination of Charlie Kirk, the administration has encouraged companies to fire people who celebrated the murder. JD Vance said: “When you see someone celebrating Charlie's murder, call them out — and, hell, call their employer.” And in fact, many employers have been firing people for saying the wrong thing about Kirk. Trump and other GOP politicians have echoed the call for people who insult Kirk to be fired.

This is a right-wing version of “cancel culture”, and it’s perfectly legal, just like it was when progressives did it. I do believe this is a restriction on freedom of speech, but it’s not a violation of the First Amendment.

But that was only the beginning. Over the last few days, the Trump administration has begun to use government power to persecute people for saying things it doesn’t like. Jimmy Kimmel, a late-night comedy show host, accused the MAGA movement of trying to make political hay out of Kirk’s murder (which appears to be true), and claimed that the killer was actually a rightist (which appears to be false). In response, Brendan Carr, Trump’s FCC Chair, threatened ABC and its local affiliates:

FCC chairman Brendan Carr has threatened to take action against ABC after Jimmy Kimmel said in a monologue that “the MAGA gang” was attempting to portray Charlie Kirk‘s assassin as “anything other than one of them.”

Appearing on Benny Johnson’s podcast on Wednesday, Carr suggested that the FCC has “remedies we can look at.”

“We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” Carr said. “These companies can find ways to change conduct and take action, frankly, on Kimmel or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.”

ABC and the local stations, worried about retaliation from the administration, immediately cancelled Kimmel’s show.

The government forcing a private company to cancel a comedy program it doesn’t like already constitutes the most significant attack on press freedom in a generation. But the Trump administration has signaled that this is only the beginning of a much broader, deeper government campaign to stamp out opinions it doesn’t like.

Attorney General Pam Bondi declared that freedom of speech doesn’t extend to “hate speech” — something radical progressives have long argued, and conservatives have long resisted.

Conservatives got very mad at Bondi, and she backtracked, saying that “hate speech” won’t be prosecuted after all. But then Trump came out and declared his desire to revoke the FCC licenses of TV networks that oppose his administration, and Carr appeared to endorse some version of the idea:

President Donald Trump on Thursday suggested that the federal government might revoke the licenses of broadcast television networks that are “against” him…“They give me only bad publicity, press. I mean, they’re getting a license,” Trump said, according to audio from a press gaggle provided by the White House.

“I would think maybe their license should be taken away,” Trump said…The president said that the decision “will be up to Brendan Carr.”…Trump specifically referred to criticism he has gotten from Kimmel and CBS late-night talk-show host Stephen Colbert…

“Look, that’s something that should be talked about for licensing, too,” Trump said…“When you have a network and you have evening shows, and all they do is hit Trump,” he said. “That’s all they do. If you go back, I guess they haven’t had a conservative on in years or something, somebody said.”…“But when you go back, take a look, all they do is hit Trump. They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that. They’re an arm of the Democrat party,” he said.

Carr earlier Thursday told CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” that “we’re not done yet” with changes in “the media ecosystem” that are consequences of Trump’s election.

Trump isn’t even making it about Kirk anymore; he’s simply using government power to threaten private companies that criticize him. He also called for other late-night comedians to be fired, despite the fact that they haven’t said anything about Kirk that offended conservatives. He called for jail time for people protesting against him, and threatened a reporter for questioning him about “hate speech”.

Meanwhile, a few Republicans are coming right out and rejecting the First Amendment:

In fact, some Republicans who consider themselves defenders of unfettered speech are getting more comfortable with limiting it. Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., told Semafor that “an FCC license, it’s not a right. It really is a privilege.”

“Under normal times, in normal circumstances, I tend to think that the First Amendment should always be sort of the ultimate right. And that there should be almost no checks and balances on it. I don’t feel that way anymore,” Lummis added.

“I feel like something’s changed culturally. And I think that there needs to be some cognizance that things have changed,” she added. “We just can’t let people call each other those kinds of insane things and then be surprised when politicians get shot and the death threats they are receiving and then trying to get extra money for security.”

And Fox News host Kayleigh McEnany effused:

For all the concerns about the First Amendment, the First Amendment… what about all the amendments Charlie Kirk lost, because Charlie Kirk has no amendments right now.

This is all incredibly bad. Even many conservatives and some rightists agree that it’s incredibly bad. Freedom of speech, and of the press, is the most bedrock freedom that Americans possess — the core value that divides us not just from authoritarian states, but even from other democracies like the UK and Canada who see the freedom as less absolute. It is no coincidence that the First Amendment is the first.

Why is freedom of speech so essential to American civilization, and to democracy? Because once freedom of speech is eliminated, it becomes far easier for power-hungry regimes to cancel other freedoms as well, since no one will be able to speak out in opposition. You don’t need any vague slippery-slope arguments to realize that freedom of speech is the first and most essential bulwark against the abrogation of all freedoms.¹

And there is a reason why we go to so much greater lengths to protect people against government restrictions on speech. Government has a monopoly on the use of force; the danger of being fired or debanked for saying the wrong thing definitely makes people feel less free, but it’s nothing compared to the danger of being thrown in a dungeon. If Trump and his people had stuck to “cancel culture” after Kirk’s death, I would have stuck to making snide comments about their hypocrisy. But now that they’ve declared their intent to leverage the power of the government against anyone who opposes them, it’s a five-alarm fire.

Is there anything interesting to say about this issue other than “free speech is good, and we should defend it”? In fact, I think there are at least two additional points to make here.