WE’VE REACHED A POLITICAL LIMIT
BEYOND WHICH WE DARE NOT GO
Anyone who would reject the idea that government should not be permitted to obstruct the free expression of information, ideas, and opinions — as that amendment specifically states — would be denying a fundamental assumption on which our nation is based.
Yes, there are limits to free expression.
You aren’t free to incite violence or crime (as, for instance, in the prohibition of so-called “fighting words”). Similarly, your speech must not create a situation of danger or panic (as in the famous cliché about falsely shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater).
We have laws that impose legitimate restrictions on what you can say in public, or even what you can communicate in private if it promotes criminal activity. The limits are well established and long recognized.
But to advance the notion that government can make judgments on what is permissible speech content — based, for instance, on conformity to certain philosophical or ideological premises — is in total contradiction of our national character.