Untitled Essay, Research Paper

No other democratic society in the world permits personal freedoms to the

degree of the United States of America. Within the last sixty years, American

courts, especially the Supreme Court, have developed a set of legal doctrines

that thoroughly protect all forms of the freedom of expression. When it comes

to evaluating the degree to which we take advantage of the opportunity to

express our opinions, some members of society may be guilty of violating

the bounds of the First Amendment by publicly offending others through obscenity

or racism. Americans have developed a distinct disposition toward the freedom

of expression throughout history.

The First Amendment clearly voices a great American respect toward the freedom

of religion. It also prevents the government from “abridging the freedom

of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble

and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”1 Since the early

history of our country, the protection of basic freedoms has been of the

utmost importance to Americans.

In Langston Hughes’ poem, “Freedom,” he emphasizes the struggle to enjoy

the freedoms that he knows are rightfully his. He reflects the American desire

for freedom now when he says, “I do not need my freedom when I’m dead. I

cannot live on tomorrow’s bread.”2 He recognizes the need for freedom in

its entirety without compromise or fear.

I think Langston Hughes captures the essence of the American immigrants’

quest for freedom in his poem, “Freedom’s Plow.” He accurately describes

American’s as arriving with nothing but dreams and building America with

the hopes of finding greater freedom or freedom for the first time. He depicts

how people of all backgrounds worked together for one cause: freedom.3

I selected Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 as a fictitious example of the evils

of censorship in a world that is becoming illiterate. In this book, the

government convinces the public that book reading is evil because it spreads

harmful opinions and agitates people against the government. The vast majority

of people accept this censorship of expression without question and are content

to see and hear only the government’s propaganda.4 I found this disturbing

yet realistic. Bradbury’s hidden opposition to this form of censorship was

apparent throughout the book and finally prevailed in the end when his main

character rebelled against the practice of burning books.

Among the many forms of protests are pickets, strikes, public speeches and

rallies. Recently in New Jersey, more than a thousand community activists

rallied to draft a “human” budget that puts the needs of the poor and handicapped

as a top priority.5 Rallies are an effective means for people to use their

freedoms effectively to bring about change from the government.

Freedom of speech is constantly being challenged as is evidenced in a recent

court case where a Gloucester County school district censored reviews of

two R-rated movies from a school newspaper. Superior Court Judge, Robert

E. Francis ruled that the student’s rights were violated under the state

Constitution.6 I feel this is a major break through for students’ rights

because it limits editorial control of school newspapers by educators and

allows students to print what they feel is important.

A newly proposed bill (A-557) would prevent school officials from controlling

the content of student publications. Critics of the bill feel that “student

journalists may be too young to understand the responsibilities that come

with free speech.”7 This is a valid point; however, it would provide an excellent

opportunity for them to learn about their First Amendment rights that guarantees

free speech and freedom of the press.

In his commencement address to Monmouth College graduates, Professor Alan

Dershowitz of Harvard Law School defended the broad right to free speech.

He stated, “My message to you graduates is to assert your rights, to use

them responsibly and boldly, to oppose racism, to oppose sexism, to oppose

homophobia and bigotry of all kinds and to do so within the spirit of the

First Amendment, not by creating an exception to it.”8 I agree that one should

feel free to speak openly as long as it does not directly or indirectly lead

to the harm of others.

One of the more controversial issues was the recent 2 Live Crew incident

involving obscenity in rap music. Their record, “As Nasty as They Wanna Be,”

was ruled obscene in federal court. They were acquitted of the charges and

quickly became a free speech martyr. Although many stores pulled the album,

over two million copies sold as a result of the incident.9 I feel that in

this case the principles of free speech have been abused because young children

can purchase and listen to this obscene music.

The American flag, symbol of our country’s history and patriotism, has also

become a topic of controversy. The controversy was over the right to burn

the flag without punishment. Supreme Court Justice William Brennan offered

the response that “if there is a bedrock principle underlying the First

Amendment, it is that the Government may not prohibit the expression of an

idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.”10

Burning the flag is considered a form of symbolic speech and therefore is

protected under the First Amendment. As in the 2 Live Crew case, I feel that

we are protecting the wrong people in this case. The minority is given precedence

at the sacrifice of the majority.

The book, American Voices, is a collection of essays on the freedom of speech

and censorship. I chose to put this collection of essays into my book because

they represent the strong central theme of freedom of expression as the

cornerstone of American government, culture and life.11 Each essay strongly

defends a case for free commercial speech. Each was generally in favor of

fewer limitations on freedom of expression.

The American voice on freedom has been shaped throughout the course of history

by the initial democratic notions of the immigrants to the same desire for

greater freedom that we have today. The freedom of speech has constantly

been challenged and will continue to be challenged in the future. It is important

that we learn from the precedented cases of the past of our constitutionally

protected rights so that in the future authority will not violate our freedoms

or oppress our liberty.

Ever since colonial times, the protection of personal freedoms in the United

States has been significantly important. Even in the early stages of American

history there was an urge to put legally protected freedoms into written

government documents. The result was the drafting of the first ten amendments

to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, by James Madison. The applications

of the personal freedoms described in the Bill of Rights, particularly the

freedom of speech, have been challenged repeatedly in American courts of

law and elsewhere. These incidents and challenges of authority reflect the

defensive American attitude toward the ever important freedom of expression

and the growing significance of personal rights throughout American history.

In Colonial America, members of diverse nationalities had opposing views

on government, religion, and other subjects of interest. Serious confrontations

were prevented because of the vast lands that separated groups of varying

opinions. A person could easily settle in with other like believers and be

untouched by the prejudices and oppression of others. For this reason, Unitarians

avoided Anglican or Puritan communities. Quakers and Anabaptists were confined

to Pennsylvania and Rhode Island while Catholics were mainly concentrated

in Maryland.12 As the United States grew larger and larger, these diverse

groups were forced to live together. This may have caused individual liberties

to be violated because of the distrust and hostile feelings between ethnic

and religious groups.

Most of the initial assemblies among the colonies considered themselves immune

from criticism. They actually issued warrants of arrest, interrogated, fined,

and imprisoned anyone accused of libeling the assembly as a whole or any

of its members. Many people were tracked down for writing or speaking works

of offense.

The first assembly to meet in America, the Virginia House of Burgesses, stripped

Captain Henry Spellman of his rank when he was found guilty of “treasonable

words.”13 Even in the most tolerant colonies, printing was strictly regulated.

The press of William Bradford was seized by the government when he printed

up a copy of the colony’s charter. He was charged with seditious libel and

spent more than a year in prison.

A more famous incident was the trial of John Peter Zenger which established

the principle of a free press. In his newspaper he published satirical ballads

regarding William Cosby, the unpopular governor, and his council. His media

was described “as having in them many things tending to raise seditions and

tumults among the people of this province, and to fill their minds with a

contempt for his majesty’s government.”14 The grand jury did not indict Zenger

and the General Assembly refused to take action. The defendant was acquitted

on the basis that in cases of libel the jury should judge both law and the

facts.

James Alexander was the first colonial writer to develop a philosophy on

the freedom of speech. He founded the American Philosophical Society and

masterminded the Zenger defense. Alexander’s chief conviction was “Freedom

of speech is a principal pillar in a free government: when this support is

taken away, the constitution is dissolved and tyranny is erected on its ruins.”15

The original Constitution did not contain a bill of rights because the convention

delegates felt that individual rights were in no danger and would be protected

by the states. However, the lack of a bill of rights was the strongest objection

to the ratification of the Constitution.

Less than a decade after the Bill of Rights had been adopted it met its first

serious challenge. In 1798, there was a threat of war with France and thousands

of French refugees were living in the United States. Many radicals supported

the French cause and were considered “incompatible with social order.”16

This hysteria led Congress to enact several alien and sedition laws. One

law forbade the publication of false, scandalous or malicious writing against

the government, Congress or the President. The penalty for this crime was

a $2,000 fine and two years in prison.

The public was enraged at these laws. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison

pleaded for freedom of speech and the press. The alien and sedition laws

became a prime issue in the presidential election of 1800. Soon after Jefferson

was elected, the Sedition Act expired and those who had been convicted under

it were immediately pardoned.17

The next attack on the First Amendment occurred in 1835. President Andrew

Jackson proposed a law that would prohibit the use of mail for “incendiary

publications intended to instigate the slaves to insurrection.”18 John C.

Calhoun of South Carolina led a special committee that opposed the proposal

on grounds that it conflicted with the First Amendment. The proposal was

defeated because it was a form of censorship.

The next violation of the principles contained in the First Amendment came

on January 2, 1920. Under the direction of A. Mitchell Palmer, Woodrow Wilson’s

Attorney General, about 500 FBI agents and police raided 3,000 Russians and

other European immigrants, looking for Communists to deport. The victims

were arrested without warrants, homes were ransacked, personal property was

seized, and they were hauled off to jail.

An even more vicious episode was known as “McCarthyism,”19 an incident in

the 1950’s when Senator Joseph R. McCarthy of Wisconsin proclaimed that the

federal government had been thoroughly infiltrated by Communist agents. His

attacks on United States information libraries abroad led to the burning

of some books accused of being Communist propaganda. Reduced congressional

support caused many librarians to resign and the closing of libraries.

On the morning of December 16, 1965, thirteen year old Mary Beth Tinker went

to school in Des Moines, Iowa. She and her fifteen year old brother, John,

had decided to wear black armbands as a protest to the Vietnam War. In advance

to their arrival, the principal had decided that any student wearing an arm-

band would be told to remove it, stating that, “The schools are no place

for demonstrations.”20 If the student refused, he would be suspended until

the armband was permanently removed. On December 16, the Tinkers refused

to remove their armbands. They were suspended and did not return to school

until after January 1, when by a previous decision the protest had ended.

The students brought suit in federal court to confirm their First Amendment

right to wear the black armbands. They lost in The Federal District Court

on grounds that this type of symbolic expression might disturb school discipline.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit was divided equally

(4 4) so the decision remained unchanged.

On February 24, 1969, the United States Supreme Court decided in the students’

favor by a vote of 7 to 2. The Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District

decision was a landmark case for students’ rights and liberties. Speaking

for the majority of the Court, Justice Abe Fortas wrote, “It can hardly be

argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights

to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”21

During the sixties and early seventies a new wave of court battles for First

Amendment freedoms emerged. The freedom of speech was recognized as a vital

element in a democratic society. Censorship and the infringement of First

Amendment rights, especially among students and their newspapers, could not

and would not be tolerated. American citizens took a firm stand against the

government and authority at important times when they could have yielded

to the oppressive violations of their rights.

ENDNOTES

22″Amendments to the Constitution.” Collier’s Encyclopedia, 1965 ed.

23Langston Hughes, The Panther and the Lash (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.,

1967), 55.

24Langston Hughes, Selected Poems (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1981),

291-293.

25Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451 (New York: Ballantine Books, 1973).

26Donna Leusner, “Social Services Advocates Rally for ‘Human’ Touch in State

Budget,” The Star Ledger, 9 April 1991: A-3.

27″Student Wins Freedom of Speech Case,” Daily Record, 24 April 1991: A-2.

28Bob McHugh, “‘Free Speech’ Moves for School Newspapers,” The Star Ledger,

4 May 1991: A-3.

29Cathy Bugman, “Monmouth Grads Hear Top Lawyer Defend Broad Right to Free

Speech,” The Star Ledger, 27 May 1991: A-9.

30David Gates, “The Importance of Being Nasty,” Newsweek, 2 July 1990: 52.

31Walter Isaacson, “O’er the Land of the Free,” Time, 3 July 1989: 14-15.

32American Voices (New York: Phillip Morris, 1987).

33The First Freedom Today (Chicago: American Library, 1984), 3.

34The First Freedom Today, 4.

35The First Freedom Today.

36The First Freedom Today, 5.

37The First Freedom Today.

38American Voices (New York: Phillip Morris, 1987), 292.

39The First Freedom Today, 5.

40The First Freedom Today, 7.

41Nat Hentoff, The First Freedom (New York: Dell Publishing Co., 1980), 4.

42Hentoff, 5.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

“Amendments to the Constitution.” Collier’s Encyclopedia. 1965 ed.

American Voices. New York: Phillip Morris, 1987.

Bollinger, Lee. C. The Tolerant Society. New York:

Oxford University Press, 1986.

Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine Books, 1973.

Bugman, Cathy. “Monmouth Grads Hear Top Lawyer Defend Broad Right to Free

Speech.” The Star Ledger, 27 May 1991: A-9.

First Freedom Today, The. Chicago: American Library Association, 1984.

Gates, David. “The Importance of Being Nasty.” Newsweek, 2 July 1990: 52.

Hentoff, Nat. The First Freedom. New York: Dell Publishing Co., 1980.

Hughes, Langston. The Panther and the Lash. New York:

Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1967.

Hughes, Langston. Selected Poems. New York:

Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1981.

Isaacson, Walter. “O’er the Land of the Free.” Time,

3 July 1989: 14-15.

Kalven, Harry, Jr. A Worthy Tradition. New York: Harper and Row, 1988.

Leusner, Donna. “Social Services Advocates Rally for ‘Human’ Touch in State

Budget.” The Star Ledger,

9 April 1991: A-3.

McHugh, Bob. “‘Free Speech’ Moves for School Newspapers.” The Star Ledger,

4 May 1991: A-3.

“Student Wins Freedom of Speech Case.” Daily Record,

24 April 1991: A-2.