December 2, 2025
The earliest drafts of the U.S. Constitution did not include a bill of rights. Among those working on the Constitution who thought a bill of rights was important were Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, now known as the “father of the Constitution.”
When the delegates of the Constitutional Convention provided the document to the states for ratification, they realized that without a rights declaration, ratification could be difficult.
Some states quickly ratified the document, however, others had hotly contested debates. When those states did ratify the document, they included features that they wanted to be added.
Eventually, the elements of the Bill of Rights were added to the Constitution as amendments.
What ultimately became the First Amendment to the Constitution was the one protecting the establishment of religion, and its free exercise; the freedom of speech and the press; the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Of those First Amendment items, the idea of free speech is the one that is currently the most prominent.
Over the past several years, the charge has been that various sources — including newspapers and magazines, radio and television news organizations and social media — had been censoring what they regarded as “misinformation,” “disinformation,” “false information,” etc.
There is no doubt that certain things were banned, as the censors admitted as much. But whether they should have banned those opinions and contrary ideas is still being defended.
Those who censored comments claimed they were protecting the public from false information, as if it was their duty, and within their ability to make such judgements. In a country with a constitutional defense of a right of free speech, it was neither of those things.
However, the ability of the people to express their thoughts and ideas about what is happening, what should happen, or what should not happen should be banned only under very special circumstances.
Throughout our history there have been many explanations of why even unpopular speech should not be regulated or banned.
Here are some of them:
* “If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” George Washington (1783)
* “We can never be sure that the opinion we are endeavouring to stifle is a false opinion; and if we were sure, stifling it would be an evil still.” – John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (1859)
* “He who stifles free discussion, secretly doubts whether what he professes to believe is really true.” – Wendell Phillips (1870)
* “Some people’s idea of [free speech] is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone says anything back, that is an outrage.” – Winston Churchill, (1943)
* “If liberty means anything at all it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear…” – George Orwell (1945)
* The U.S. Supreme Court in Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. said, in part, “We begin with the common ground. Under the First Amendment, there is no such thing as a false idea. However pernicious an opinion may seem, we depend for its correction not on the conscience of judges and juries but on the competition of other ideas.”
* “Freedom of speech is indivisible; unless we protect it for all, we will have it for none.” Law professor Harry Kalven
* “If you are afraid to say it, that is exactly why it needs to be said.” Journalist Andy Rooney
* “If you had to pick one freedom that was the most essential to the functioning of a democracy, it has to be freedom of speech. Because democracy means persuading one another, and then ultimately voting, and the majority, the majority rules. You can’t run such a system if there is a muzzling of one point of view. So, it’s a fundamental freedom in a democracy.” Former U.S Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, speaking at the National Press Club
* Yet, historically, the greatest threat to citizens has come not from those who state falsehoods but those who claim the right to regulate what is true and false.” Jonathon Turley, law professor and author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage”
However, even the First Amendment to the Constitution does not protect certain types of speech. These categories are types of speech that may be dangerous. These include obscenity, fraud, child pornography, speech integral to illegal conduct, speech that incites lawless action, speech that violates intellectual property law, and true threats.
Speech that may be obviously untrue, but not actually harmful, as are those in the preceding list, may not be banned.
Notice that political speech by Democrats or Republicans or whomever, are not included in the list of speech which may be banned.
So, let’s be honest and open about the differences in ideas. We should combat ideas that we find unpopular, but not with cowardly censorship, but with better and more sensible ideas.
Freedom of speech is one of the several ideas that sets the United States of America above other nations, and we must not allow it or the others to be taken away.
