First rule of speech controversies: no one appeals to the Constitution to protect popular opinion. Words that need defending are always repugnant, obnoxious, and offensive to someone’s sensibilities. Cops have to put up with “Fuck the Police,” bankers have to abide communists (and vice versa), black Americans coexist with the Klan, and everyone has to live with NAMBLA. Entering a speech debate, expect to wince.
Between a duel of loud headlines about Jeffrey Epstein and Russiagate, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Education (FIRE) this morning filed Stanford Daily Publishing Corporation, Jane Doe, and John Doe v. Marco Rubio and Kristi Noem, challenging the Trump administration’s immigration policies on speech grounds. The suit will test the patience of anyone frustrated by excesses in recent campus protests, some of which themselves crossed First Amendment lines. But FIRE, which has been such an important actor in fighting digital censorship, is doing the right thing. In the name of trying to protect the country, the Trump administration is advertising to the world its misunderstanding of a core American idea. It’s a mess:
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Matt Taibbi
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://taibbi.substack.com/feed and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.
