The First Amendment and the Obligation to Peacefully Disrupt in a Free Society (22 October 2011), Blog Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/occupy-wall-street-bloomberg-free-speech-right-to-disruption-_b_1026535.html at huffingtonpost.com
“The Wrong Response to Holtzman”, New York Times, Dec. 30, 1987
And it is addressed, in particular, to speech critical of the government.
New York Times (July 19, 2012)
2010s
“I would rather have a clean government than one where 'First Amendment rights' are being respected”
On the Don Imus show (28 April 2006)
2000s, 2006
Context: I work in Washington and I know that money corrupts. And I and a lot of other people were trying to stop that corruption. Obviously, from what we've been seeing lately, we didn't complete the job. But I would rather have a clean government than one where 'First Amendment rights' are being respected that has become corrupt. If I had my choice, I'd rather have the clean government.
“And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment”
1961, Address to ANPA
Context: Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed — and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment — the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution- -not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants" — but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.
This means greater coverage and analysis of international news — for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security — and we intend to do it.
Alabama Republican Assemblies Luncheon, April 29, 2000. http://renewamerica.us/archives/speeches/00_04_29alral.htm.
2000
“The First Amendment, I think, is the jewel of our Constitution.”
Alito: Threat to Judicial Independence at Historic High http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1159866330219, by Michael Scholl [2006-10-04].
“Net neutrality is the First Amendment issue of our time.”
"Sen. Franken's Speech to Free Press Group in Minneapolis" (19 August 2010) http://www.franken.senate.gov/?p=news&id=1044
Context: Net neutrality is the First Amendment issue of our time. Today, a blog can load as fast as the Wall Street Journal — and, if the blog is good, it can get more traffic than any media conglomerate. But if bigger companies can pay for faster, priority Internet access, that blogger no longer has a shot. And these big companies know that when they pay for access, they win. They want preferred treatment on the Internet like the preferred treatment they get in the rest of their lives.
Concurring in New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971).
New York Times (July 19, 2012)
2010s
