laws are intended to silence those who voice unpopular ideas: “If the state could use [criminal] laws not for their intended purposes but to silence those who voice unpopular ideas, little would be left of our First Amendment liberties, and little would separate us from the tyrannies of the past or the malignant fiefdoms of our own age. The freedom to speak without risking arrest is ‘one of the principal characteristics by which we distinguish a free nation.’”—Justice Neil Gorsuch, dissenting, Nieves v. Bartlett (2019)|If the government could utilize laws intended to punish criminal activity to instead quiet those who express unpopular opinions, our First Amendment rights would be severely diminished, and we would be little different from the tyrannical regimes of history or the oppressive fiefdoms of today. The ability to speak freely without fear of arrest is a defining feature of a truly free society, as stated by Justice Neil Gorsuch in his dissenting opinion in Nieves v. Bartlett (2019).
The Global Censorship Agenda Unveiled: Governments’ War on Free Speech Exposed : Dive into the dark reality of global censorship as governments tighten their grip on free speech, manipulating narratives to suppress dissenting voices. Explore the hidden agenda behind the crackdown on truth and free expression.
Comments
Post a Comment