Our “First Principles Series” is an ongoing awareness effort by Beacon to restore our nation’s commitment to those principles of free markets, individual liberty, and limited government that have made America the best nation in the history of the world. Often, politicians eager to appease constituents can stray from these principles. And voters can be misled into believing that policies violating these principles are in their best interest when they’re not. This series is designed to set the record straight and make the case for standing up for our most important principles, even when it might be politically expedient to ignore them. Read our entire “First Principles Series” here.
People in some countries are jailed (or worse) for expressing unpopular thoughts. Americans, by contrast, benefit from a rich First Amendment tradition that protects them from government sanction for expressing unpopular views. In a free society, people must be free to think. Individuals may not call on the government to censor disagreeable thoughts but should instead engage those thoughts in discussion and debate.
Yet free speech is under attack. Echoing a talking point traditionally associated with progressives, Attorney General Pam Bondi recently vowed to go after those who express hate speech in the wake of the tragic death of Charlie Kirk. The Attorney General walked back her comments just days later, but let’s be clear: there’s no “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment. As the Supreme Court stated in a decision 14 years ago, speech can move people to tears of both joy and sorrow, but the First Amendment protects even hurtful speech from government retribution.
That’s because individuals can’t speak freely if what they say can land them in jail, merely because a government official felt that what they said was hateful. One example comes from a case I won at the U.S. Supreme Court seven years ago. The case involved a First Amendment challenge to a Minnesota ban on political apparel at the polling place, which the government claimed was necessary to ensure peace and tranquility at the polls. The government argued that t-shirts featuring the text of the First Amendment would be allowed because such shirts were not political. But t-shirts featuring the text of the Second Amendment? Political and banned.
Even if government officials across the political spectrum could somehow agree on what qualifies as “hateful,” that would still not justify a ban on “hate speech.” American speakers throughout our country’s history have advanced bold ideas, not because they were popular but because they were right. We at Beacon continue that tradition today. We advocate for the right to earn a living—even if it offends those who benefit from protectionist licensing rules. We advocate for property rights—even if it offends those who think they should have the ultimate say on what you’re able to do on your own property. And we advocate for the right of parents to choose the best education for their children—even if it offends those committed to maintaining a government monopoly on education.
Beacon tirelessly advocates for the principles of liberty whether government officials like them or not. Thanks to the First Amendment, all Americans are free to do the same.