The presentation at Menomonie Public Library on started with a You Tube video on Free Speech.
The first speaker was Nadin Strossen, daughter of a Jewish holocaust survivor and former president of the ACLU. She defends free speech. Speech can do an infinite amount of harm as well as an infinite amount of good. She doesn’t want our country to suppress ideas, even if those ideas are deemed to be unpopular or hated. She believes that free speech is the bedrock of every other right. Laws against hate speech around the world are disproportionately enforced against the minority groups which we hope to protect. Allowing our government to pick and choose censorship would allow it to silence critics. Restriction of free speech should be limited with the government never suppressing speech solely because of content, message or viewpoint. In certain cases, defined by the “emergency principle,” serious, imminent and specific harm caused by speech that incites of imminent violence or a true threat of violence are illegal. The emergency principle also disallows the targeted bullying of individuals and small groups.
Nicholas Christakis, a sociologist and physician, believes in defending freedom of expression even though you disagree with those expressions. You can use your freedom of speech to disagree. You test your own ideas by arguing with those who disagree with your ideas.
Floyd Abrams, attorney, described the U.S. Supreme Court decision of New York Times v. Sullivan in 1964. This decision changed the protection of libel law to protect freedom of speech about public figures and officials. You can not be sued unless you say something you know is false or you suspect is untrue. Mr. Abrams told us that America has always been a country with more protection for freedom of speech, religion and press than any other country in the history of the world.
Michael Schermer is a best selling author and skeptic who has defended the free speech of holocaust deniers. When David Irvine, a holocaust denier, traveled in Austria to give a speech, he was arrested at the airport on arrival, was tried and convicted in court and was put in jail. Mr. Schermer shared his concern about these actions as a prosecution of a thought crime, as Mr. Irvine had not given his speech. Thought crimes have been prosecuted in North Korea and the Soviet Union. Mr. Schermer believes that you need to talk to and listen to other people to strengthen both your ideas and positions. If you understand someone else’s position, you can argue against it.
Alice Dreger is a writer, historian, and journalist. She wants right wingers on college campuses to be able to express their ideas in educational institutions. Listening to a wide variety of opinions helps the conversation about ideas. Students need to evaluate data and evidence and to think about the issues. Conversations need to be done with integrity and honesty. Ideas need to be aired in a non abusive manner.
The last speaker in the video was John Zimmerman, a liberal Democrat and a professor of history and education. He is committed to free speech. He brought Mary Beth Tinker to one of his classes. As a thirteen year old, she had participated in symbolic speech in her Des Moines school, using arm bands to protest the war in Vietnam. She was involved with the U.S. Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines – 1969. The decision in that case decided that “neither students nor teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the school house gate.” Mary Beth knew that her speech hurt classmates who had members of their family involved with fighting the war in Vietnam. She realized as a minor, the only power she had was her speech. Speech is a weapon of the powerless. If free speech is censored that will most effect the people with the least power. And censorship can be turned against all of us.
After the video, James Duvall, retired judge from Buffalo and Pepin counties, led a discussion about Freedom of Speech. He started with showing the 1st Amendment, pointing out the limited wording about our guaranteed freedoms of religion, speech and the press. Interpretation of Freedom of Speech must be made in court decisions. The court of last appeal is the U.S. Supreme Court. So far our Supreme Court has established a high standard for restricting speech ensuring that the government rarely silences expression.
According to Judge Duvall, there are 3 basic judicial philosophies that help determine settling cases. The 1st is Originalism which tries to determine what the writers of our constitution meant or what was their intent. The 2nd is Textualism which just looks at the words in the constitution. If it is not written, it doesn’t apply. The 3rd is a Living Constitution: How do we interpret our constitution in today’s world? – considering all changes in technology and social positions of the governed. In this philosophy, the constitution is considered to be flexible to meet current conditions and modern ideas. With these different philosophies, court cases can be decided differently by different judges. Judges are human, they have their biases.
The questions about interpretation of the freedom of speech are very complex. What is offensive conduct? What kind of speech is harmful? Yelling fire in a movie theater can cause a tremendous amount of harm to others and this act doesn’t qualify as free speech. Workplace and private property are spaces that can limit speech. Pornography is difficult to define.
Judge Duvall left us with the message that all state judges are elected in Wisconsin. As judges are interpreting our rights, it is important that we learn about them and their judicial philosophies.
Our next Community Conversations will be Saturday, Dec 6, at 1 pm. We are joining with LWV-Chippewa Valley in a presentation at UW-Stout Harvey Hall Theater for in-person interviews with WI Supreme Court Justice candidates.
Chris Taylor will be interviewed on Saturday, December 6 at 1 pm. Maria Lazar will be interviewed on Wednesday, February 4 at 5 pm. Both events will be held in Harvey Hall Theater, UW-Stout. (For more information see article “Interviews with Candidates for WI Supreme Court” also in this issue).
As space is limited, participants are encouraged to pre-register. Register here.
Lorene Vedder is a retired physician and the founder of Community Connections.
