Free speech for the dumb?

Laura Schlessinger recently found herself embroiled in controversy after using racial epithets several times on her talk radio show.  This incident has led Dr. Schlessinger to abandon her program, proclaiming “”I want my First Amendment rights back, which I can’t have on radio without the threat of attack on my advertisers and stations.”

Over at NPR, Linda Holmes argues that being economically pressured for her speech is not a violation of her First Amendment rights.  As Holmes draws the distinction, the Constitution guarantees that speech will be “free from government interference,” not “free from consequences.”

The article brings up not only questions of free speech, but also questions about the respect owed to other ideals cherished in a liberal democracy.

-Han

Photo by Flickr user Ian Hayhurst used under a Creative Commons Attribution license.

Related posts:

  1. The myth of a “national security” limitation on free speech
  2. Free speech and Islam
  3. Fish on the First, Continued
  4. Is it unfair to televise an Obama speech?
  5. Mandatory public philosophy courses in high school?

Comments

Leave a Reply




  • Editors

    Jacob Bronsther is a law student at NYU. He has an MPhil in Political Theory from Oxford.

  • Sam Gill is a consultant in DC. He studied Political Theory at Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar.

  • Marc Grinberg is a Presidential Management Fellow. He studied Political Theory at Oxford.

  • John Rood is founder of Next Step Test Prep. He has an AM in Political Theory from Chicago.

  • Luke Freedman is studying Philosophy and Political Science at Carleton College.


  • Writers

    Jonathan Barentine

    Ethan Davison

    Han Li

    Charles Wang


  • Sign up for the TPP Weekly Rewind


  • Share us