Earlier this week I saw a lady make a comment on Twitter about all the sorts of people she didn’twant in America. Mexicans and Black folk made the list, along with a few others.
Her next Twitter post read as follows:
“My Twitter account got SUSPENDED for 12 HOURS after giving MY OPINION. If this doesn’t change, I will be contacting MY LAWYER.”
With so many capital letters, you know she was very, very serious.
As an attorney, this made me chuckle.
I have never had a furious person with no clue how the First Amendment works storm into my office and demand justice because a private individual or business responded to their speech in a lawful way that created negative consequences for them, but I must confess that it is on my professional bucket list (I’ve already had a Sovereign Citizen, for those of you who know what that is, but that right there is a whole other column).
It has become quite apparent to me since the advent of social media just how much misunderstanding there is out there about the First Amendment and free speech, so today I’m going to do what I can do clear that up.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution acknowledges and ensures that the United States government will protect the right of individuals to free speech. What that means in practical terms is that protects individuals from prosecution or other retaliation by the government because of statements made by those individuals. It does not at all protect against actions by other private individuals or private organizations taken because of a person’s speech.
So, if a person says something, and because of that other private individuals or organizations decide to boycott their business, publicly shame them, speak harshly to them, ban them from an internet community or social media platform, fire them, cancel their TV show, stop advertising with them, or whatever, that does not violate their First Amendment right to free speech. That right is quite intact. Other people are simply exercising their right to free speech in response to what that person said. Free speech goes both ways, and other people can use it to do things to you that you don’t like that are legal and constitutionally protected.
Now again, that only applies to actions taken by private individuals or entities. If the action taken against someone because of their speech is taken by a government organization, like a public school district, police department, city, county, or state government, or the U.S. government, that is an altogether different situation. The First Amendment will apply in nearly all circumstances. How that plays out in different situations is the subject of a lot of Supreme Court cases that I don’t really have the space to get into here, but my point is that once the government becomes involved, so does the First Amendment.
The Constitution does not exist to shield people from all consequences of their words. No one has that right. It exists to keep the government from censoring them. That’s it.
And now you know more than that lady on Twitter.
‘Til next week.
Caleb Baumgardner is a local attorney. He can be reached at [email protected].