Cityclubexteriorblog

#FreeSpeech in the News: Sept. 13, 2016

As the Citadel of Free Speech here in Cleveland, we work to protect and promote the basis of our democracy by sharing related stories, commentary, and opinions on free speech in the 21st century. Here's what's making the news - and what you should know about - this week.

 

“The First Amendment has been interpreted to protect even defamatory speech against public figures. But as the Hogan case shows, not every court applies the constitutional standard correctly. In that environment, even legally empty threats have a chilling effect.”

Roger Ailes’ Empty Lawsuit Is a Threat to Free Speech, Bloomberg View

 

“Kaepernick, who got the whole thing started, insists that he loves his country but objects to its treatment of people of color. His well-meant protest, alas, has met the moment that Doctorow described, for the conversation is no longer about the subject of Kaepernick’s protest, but the protest itself. And not even the conversation about the protest has gone particularly well. The Constitution keeps getting in the way.”

Free-Speech Debate Misses Kaepernick’s Point, Bloomberg View

 

The First Amendment applies to government. Which is why presidential candidates should get it right. Unfortunately, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton don't.”

Free Speech, Creators.com

 

“FIRE is seeing an encouraging uptick in pro-free speech statements by college administrators early in this academic year. In just a few weeks’ time, administrators at schools like Columbia University, Brown University, and Claremont Mckenna College (CMC) have all made public statements committing to protect freedom of expression on campus.”

Could It Be a Trend? More Colleges Endorse Free Speech After UChicago, theFIRE.org

 

“Citizens United was based on core First Amendment principles: the right to think and speak your mind, to associate with others and to use your own resources to make yourself heard. Overturning it would be a disaster for free speech.”

Overturning Citizen’s United would be a disaster for free speech, The Hill

 

“Sarcasm is fun and empowering. It comes, however, with a swift and fulfilling moral payoff that, in the long run, degrades the semantic integrity of language.”

How a ban on sarcasm is a protection of free speech, The Hindu

 

“The implication was that students who support trigger warnings and safe spaces are narrow-minded, oversensitive and opposed to dialogue. The letter betrayed a fundamental misunderstanding of what the terms ‘trigger warnings’ and ‘safe spaces’ mean, and came across as an embarrassing attempt to deflect attention from serious issues on campus.”

Trigger Warnings, Safe Spaces and Free Speech, Too, The New York Times

Comments (0)

You must be signed in to leave a comment. Sign In / Register