Below is my column in The Hill on why a Harris-Walz Administration would be a nightmare for free speech. A long-standing advocate for censorship and other speech controls, Vice President Kamala Harris just added an equally menacing candidate to her ticket for 2024.
Here is the column:
The selection of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) as the running mate for Vice President Kamala Harris has led to intense debates over crime policy, war claims, gender identity policies and other issues.
Some attacks have, in my view, been inaccurate or overwrought. However, the greatest danger from this ticket is neither speculative nor sensational. A Harris-Walz administration would be a nightmare for free speech.
For over three years, the Biden-Harris administration has sustained an unrelenting attack on the freedom of speech, from supporting a massive censorship system (described by a federal court as an “Orwellian Ministry of Truth“) to funding blacklisting operations targeting groups and individuals with opposing views.
President Biden made censorship a central part of his legacy, even accusing social media companies of “killing people” for failing to increase levels of censorship. Democrats in Congress pushed that agenda by demanding censorship on subjects ranging from climate change to gender identity — even to banking policy — in the name of combatting “disinformation.”
The administration also created offices like the Disinformation Governance Board before it was shut down after public outcry. But it quickly shifted this censorship work to other offices and groups.
As vice president, Harris has long supported these anti-free speech policies. The addition of Walz completes a perfect nightmare for free speech advocates. Walz has shown not only a shocking disregard for free speech values but an equally shocking lack of understanding of the First Amendment.
Walz went on MSNBC to support censoring disinformation and declared, “There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy.”
Ironically, this false claim, repeated by many Democrats, constitutes one of the most dangerous forms of disinformation. It is being used to convince a free people to give up some of their freedom with a “nothing to see here” pitch.
In prior testimony before Congress on the censorship system under the Biden administration, I was taken aback when the committee’s ranking Democrat, Del. Stacey Plaskett (D-Virgin Islands), declared, “I hope that [all members] recognize that there is speech that is not constitutionally protected,” and then referenced hate speech as an example.
That false claim has been echoed by others such as Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), who is a lawyer. “If you espouse hate,” he said, “…you’re not protected under the First Amendment.” Former Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean declared the identical position: “Hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment.”
Even some dictionaries now espouse this false premise, defining “hate speech” as “Speech not protected by the First Amendment, because it is intended to foster hatred against individuals or groups based on race, religion, gender, sexual preference, place of national origin, or other improper classification.”
The Supreme Court has consistently rejected the claim of Gov. Walz. For example, in the 2016 Matal v. Tam decision, the court stressed that this precise position “strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express ‘the thought that we hate.’”
As the new Democratic vice-presidential candidate, Walz is running alongside one of the most enthusiastic supporters of censorship and blacklisting systems.
In her failed 2020 presidential bid, Harris ran on censorship and pledged that her administration “will hold social media platforms accountable for the hate infiltrating their platforms, because they have a responsibility to help fight against this threat to our democracy.”
In October 2019, Harris dramatically spoke directly to Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, insisting “This is not a matter of free speech….This is a matter of holding corporate America and these Big Tech companies responsible and accountable for what they are facilitating.” She asked voters to join her in the effort.
They didn’t, but Harris ultimately succeeded in the Biden-Harris administration to an unprecedented degree with a comprehensive federal effort to target and silence individuals and groups on social media.
In my new book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I detailed how President Biden is the most anti-free speech president since John Adams. Unlike Adams, I have never viewed Biden as the driving force behind the massive censorship and blacklisting operations supported by his subordinates, including Harris. That is not to say that Biden does not share the shame in these measures. He was willing to sacrifice not only free speech but also institutions like the Supreme Court in a desperate effort to rescue his failing nomination.
The substitution of Harris for Biden makes this the second election in which free speech is the key issue for voters. In 1800, Thomas Jefferson defeated Adams, in large part based on his pledge to reverse the anti-free speech policies of the prior administration, including the use of the Alien and Sedition Acts to arrest his opponents.
With the addition of Walz, Democrats now have arguably the most anti-free speech ticket of a major party in more than two centuries. Both candidates are committed to using disinformation, misinformation and malinformation as justifications for speech controls. The third category has been emphasized by the Biden-Harris administration, which explained that it is information “based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.”
Walz has the advantage in joining this anti-free speech ticket without the burden of knowledge of what is protected under the First Amendment.
With the Harris-Walz ticket, we have come full circle to the very debate at the start of this republic. The warnings of the Founders to reject the siren’s call of censorship remain tragically relevant today. Free speech was and remains our “indispensable right.”
As Benjamin Franklin warned, “In those wretched countries where a man cannot call his tongue his own, he can scarce call anything his own. Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech….Without freedom of thought there can be no such thing as wisdom, and no such thing as public liberty without freedom of speech, which is the right of every man.”
With her selection of Walz, Harris has decided to put free speech on the ballot in this election. It is a debate that our nation should welcome, as it did in 1800.
The Biden-Harris administration has notably toned down its anti-free speech efforts as the election approaches. Leading censorship advocates have also gone mostly silent.
If successful, a Harris-Walz administration is expected to bring back those policies and personalities with a vengeance. That could be radically enhanced if the Democrats take both houses of Congress and once again block investigations into their censorship programs.
The media has worked very hard to present Harris and Walz as the “happy warriors.” Indeed, they may be that and much more. The question is what they are happy about in their war against free speech.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage” (Simon and Schuster).
nice informtion Web Tracking
Find your favorite games on Picaso Games! We offer free online games of all kinds, from small, easy games to more challenging experiences. Dive in and start playing now!
Hi!
Walz’s record:
signed a bill to allow the government to take custody of your child if you refuse to give them ” gender affirming care”.
gave illegals driver’s licenses
gave illegals ” free” healthcare
signed a law mandating tampons in boys bathrooms
Hosted Asad Zaman of the Muslim American Society of Minnesota, who has a pro Hitler website in the capital
refused to send the national guard during the riots.
Setup a snitch hotline so neighbors could report on each other for lockdown violations during covid.
Said he would invest in a ladder factory to help illegals climb Trump’s wall
He committed stolen valor by lying about being in battle.
https://x.com/i/status/1820918063966962143
Tim Walz helped free a man convicted of murdering an 11-year-old girl.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13715977/tim-walz-myon-burrell-free-prison-arrest.html
Timpon claims he suffered from PTSD after his tour in Iraq……… he never went to Iraq
x.com/i/status/1822413394474876965
Wasn’t the sedition trial of 1944 as much of an attack on free speech as the efforts of the current Democratic administration?
The censorship extends to The Hill not even listing this article anywhere on its site.
Here it is under Opinion – Civil Rights
https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/4820490-harris-walz-administration-free-speech/
“. . . a Harris-Walz Administration would be a nightmare for free speech.”
Walz claimed to have been in combat. He was not.
For years, he claimed a military rank that he did not earn.
That is called “stolen valor.”
It is a short step from stealing valor to stealing the right to free speech — while, of course, falsely claiming that you are not a censor.
I would take a chill pill, and at least watch carefully for what kinds of voices speak at the DNC. More than half of Dem voters are “liberals” in the traditional sense (open-minded improvers guided by common sense). They may not sign up for JT’s outlandishly broad definition of free speech, which defends intentional frauds waged to dupe the public, the use of intimidating threats waged from behind the veil of anonymity, and giving foreign adversaries unfettered use of our media to wage infowarfare on America with the goal of destroying it (including brainwashing our children). Or, if JT has reservations about such militant tactics being protected by free speech, he doesn’t reveal it.
The part JT has right is that you would never entrust defining the scope of speech freedom to leftist zealots. But, neither would you trust rightist fanatics / cultists. Nor, radical Islamists. Nor, racial essentialists.
The sober, dispassionate conversation of a nation weighing its policy options — elevating the best ideas — requires the tamping down of zealotry, with its paranoid, hair-on-fire, Machiavellian style of unhinged infowarfare. When hotheads dominate the infospace, good ideas remain unexplored on the sidelines. A productive conversation requires moderation, which requires rules of civility, honesty, and responsibility to be enforced. Of course militants will howl “censorship” at being denuded of their informatic weaponry — too bad for them. Good for the rest of us.
Civility is not a muzzle. It’s a self-restraining filter. Setting the expectation that ideas be expressed with respect and civility is the ante for living in a self-governing free society. That’s the challenge we’re facing. We let raucus individualism and factionalism get out of hand. Techies naively eliminated infospace gatekeepers. Restoring norms of goodwill and open-mindedness is our present task.
JT might be in sympathy with that goal of traditional liberalism, but it’s going to take stronger demands for civility and moderation than he is presently espousing.
Demand away, it is your right to do so. And my right to ignore your demands, or even denigrate the person making the demand of my preferred content. I don’t get to determine what you see (unless, of course, you are reading my scribbling) and the reverse is true – your pissing and moaning about goodwill and open-mindedness notwithstanding. Couching censorship in mild-mannered terms such as you use still is censorship. This is understanding as you apparently are a citizen, or at least a resident, of Canada without a First Amendment to protect speech with which we disagree. Presumably, whether by preference or government threat of force, you put up with Pierre’s git (political and actual) – Justin.
Understandable, not “understanding” and “such as you use” should be a comma clause.
I would respect you more if you just admitted you favor “guardrails” (i.e. censorship) on certain kinds of speech.
And I bet you love the tracking down of thought crime dissidents in the UK and Germany.
The mental gymnastics are not necessary.
And calling me a slur is not a reply.
antonio
That all sounds reasonable EXCEPT for WHO will do the “moderation” !
The content “moderators” are usually amoral, anti-American democrats. They are actually just censors.
I do not trust anyone or any group to do the moderation – public or private.
What YOU May think is extreme …… could just be the founding ideals of the freest, most prosperous, most generous country in the history of the world.
I missed the news about trump being unable to campaign due to the Biden administration striping his free speech rights I didn’t even see a blip on this on the Fox News site. Why is JT making stuff up?
maybe you took a bathroom break, fell asleep when it came on. yeah, democrats say and do stupid things. even lie.
Why is trump lying about the crowds at Harris events? Why would he lie about that? I guess because JT gives him a pass by grading trump to say anything he wants because he has a 1st amendment right?
So you want a president that lis about crowd size? give me a break. They guy is sick.
were you in the crowd? BTW, if you had any brains you would look at the pics. youre either stupid or a liar.
Why wouldn’t Trump point put yet another lie from the communist party, the radical left lunatics.
I’ve seen two campaign stumps from Bimentia and Scamala this week. Biden still trying to spin the automobile bloodbath comment into Trump pushing civil war and Scamaltoe spinning his comment of being a dictator on the first day to drill drill drill through executive action. Pathetic losers and anyone that supports them needs a lobotomy!
Some have suggested that Trump is a liar. Maybe this has something to do with it.
LOL!!!!!!!!! MAGA TRUMP – SOON TO BE BACK IN OUR WH.
The Republican Party has become a cult. Come November I hope all you trump supporters find help to overcome your grief that your orange god is not a God, he is deeply flawed human being that just wants you adoration and money. Cult is written all over this.
Now I know you all will mock me and call me all sorts of names. That is what cult members do. Mark my words the country is tired of trumps juvenile, nay, infantile rants. He will loose and the Republican Party will have gone down the shi–er with him. Shame, I voted for many a good Republican.
Sociologist? Nah, didnt think so. just a strupid talking head hoping for attention. when dems do it, its … what?
you sound WAY OVER VACCINATED. “shame” should be your middle name.
BS. X took the white dudes for Harris off his absolutest free speech site. BS. He is the threat. trump is the threat, and you JT are an enabler.
Shame on you.
Presuming that White Dudes for Harris was actually removed, and that they were not removed for some reason such as illegal conduct,
Then I will stand with you in protest of X removing White Dudes for Harris – but given that left wing nutew like you are both liars and hypocrits – you are going to have to provide evidence thjat White Dudes for Harris was actually removed, and that there was not good cause to do so – such as illegal speech or Spam or Pornography.
And that only addresses that I do not trust you because people from the left lie all the time.
I do not trust you to accurately report that they were removed.
I do not trust you to accurately report that there was not good cause to do so if they were.
Musk does claim to be an absolutist on free speech – he is not – he is a tiny h hypocrite in that sense – we all are – because no one is for absolute free speech – almost no one is for credible threats of violence. Almost no one is for child pornography. Almost no one is for pornography anywhere someone else pleases, Almost no one is for spam everywhere with no filtering.
Beyond that as those of you on the left pointed out repeatedly prior to Musk taking over Twitter – its a private company it can do what it wants. While not strictly true, it is true that the first amendment does not apply to private companies in the near absolute way it does to government.
I would be upset with Musk if he removed White Dudes for Harris simply because they annoyed him.
But he is still free to do so.
I would further note that Musk has already stated openly that though where possible he pushes back against the efforts of other countries to regulate Free speech that X is available everywhere in the world and in many instances must censor as required by local government.
That is not Musks wish and if our government stood up for our founding principles – Musk could tell those countries to screw themselves.
But our country is slowly becoming one of those that does not recognize the value of free speech, so Our government will not back Musk up if he refuses to censor to the demands of other governments.
All that said – Musk is no more a threat to free speech that Google, or Facebook or Instagram – short of all of them collaborating together to censor viewpoints outside of some blessed domain no private actor is a threat to free speech.
Again YOU have said that yourself repeatedly.
Free speech is especially NOT in any danger since Musk bought Twitter – The people who are being censored on Facebook and all the left wing dominated sites can go to Twitter or Truth or Gab or Parlor and speak their mind.
In the unlikely event that White Dudes for Harris was improprly censored on X – they can go to Instagram or TikTok or Facebook or …. and speak their mind.
This is not optimal – in a perfect world we would not have political or view point censorship anywhere – but those of you on the left are unwilling to allow that – so what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
While private censorship – by FB or X is undesirable – public censorship is unconstitutonal and Wrong.
It is wrong if Government does so directly.
It is wrong if government does so through proxies.
It is wrong if Governemt pays others to censor for them.
All of that is wrong – and unconstitutional – except on the left.
“White Dudes for Harris” is nothing more than Obama’s identity politics making amends for failing to provide a box for white misfits to be in.
Harris found them and made them their own warm comfy box. She even gave them hats to wear identifying their “home” box.
wanna back up that stmt? or are you just stupid and delusional?
*SENATOR KEELEY
Mr. Turley mentions dictionaries and the declaration hate speech is unprotected by the 1st. Yes, many books are no longer extant. It’s bordering actual evil.
A lovely evening to all…
I keep encountering people that deserve to experience nightmares.
Understatement. I would say for all their polices. Harris Selection for VP Shows that the 2020 Minnesota Summer of Love, Immigration and Transgender Policy is Coming to a Theater Near You Soon. https://shorturl.at/Ai5hQ
It is moronic to believe in freedom but not freedom fighters.
Ukraine should press on to Moscow to liberate the Russians, so that the Russians can enjoy the indispensable right that they don’t enjoy right now, what with all of the political oppression and all.
Because Zelensky has shut down media, banned democracy, and banned church denominations he doesn’t like? Yeah that makes a lot of sense /sarc
Cackles and Tampon Tim in 2024. Because the Constitution and America are obsolete and must be replaced by China-Russia Global One-World Government.
Jonathan: In this “age of rage” you rage against these days you seem to think DJT should get a pass. All his hate and revenge, his lies about everything deserves a pass. That’s because DJT is just exercising his right of “free speech”. In an ironic twist DJT has not been censored by the Biden administration or the liberal press. He is free to spew out lie after lie on his social media platform, in interviews and other conservative platforms. That puts the lie to you claim that only conservatives are being censored. Want examples?
DJT is obsessed with crowd sizes–the size of the crowd at his 2017 inauguration, the size of the crowd in front of the Capitol on J. 6, and the size of the crowds at his rallies this year. Now, DJT has gone bonkers about the size of the crowds at the Harris/Walz rallies that are much larger. This has driven DJT over the deep end and he has just made some really “weird” claims. Yesterday DJT posted this about the Harris/Walz rally at the airport in Detroit: “Has anyone noticed that Kamala CHEATED at the airport, and she ‘AI’d’ it, and showed a a massive ‘crowd’ of so-called followers, BUT THEY DIDN’T EXIST”.
The Q is why would DJT say something that is so obviously disprovable? The crowd at the Detroit airport was not the product of AI. Crowd estimates of the rally attendees show between 14,000 and 15,000 participants–far larger than any recent DJT rally. That’s what DJT is mad about so he takes misinformation and disinformation he sees on Truth Social and elsewhere and amplifies it.
I doubt voters are going to buy into DJT’s “big lies” again this time around. He has run out of lies. But DJT’s erratic and deranged behavior has demonstrated one thing. He is afraid to lose an election again. He knows what that means. He won’t be able to stop the avalanche of criminal prosecutions that face him if he loses. The fear of prison time haunts DJT every night he goes to bed and his is desperate to avoid that!
Many of the regular commenters here are seriously deluded.
My, oh my!
Now David B.Benson, some would say that comment equates to hate speech as well as misguided misinformation.
Only the left of center weirdos.