"The First Amendment of the era aided us. The guarantee of free speech is for democracy; it is worth little, in the end, apart from it."
Great @emilybazelon piece.
Fun fact from this humble foreign observer...
nytimes.com/2021/01/26/mag…
Great @emilybazelon piece.
Fun fact from this humble foreign observer...
nytimes.com/2021/01/26/mag…
The US has a rich tradition of seeing the 1A as existing to facilitate democracy and self-government. Australia drew on that thinking in implying a freedom of political communication into its Constitution which, famously, has no right to free speech.
During the same period (as Emily documents, drawing on @glakier's work), the US itself moved way from that tradition, adopting an increasingly libertarian view of the 1A instead.
So it's an exciting time for this Australian to be here, as the US public revisits the conversation about the rationales for free speech, proportionality, and the possibilities of an affirmative reading of what the right requires.
(the last time I retweeted one of Emily's pieces about rethinking the 1A i got told i belonged in Gitmo BUT I WILL NOT BE CHILLED)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
