NYT wages front-page assault on the First Amendment, says free speech is dangerous when conservatives exercise it

In recent days The New York Times proved once again that it’s nothing more than a propaganda organ for the American hard-Left and that it’s only interested in helping its preferred political party regain power and then hold it by authoritarian means.

As reported by The Daily Caller, an article that was noticeably not labeled an opinion piece actually argued that conservatives have “weaponized” the First Amendment and that our use and defense of it is somehow a threat to our democratic republic.

Under the headline, “How Conservatives Weaponized the First Amendment,” Adam Liptak managed to get on the paper’s Sunday front page — huge in terms of garnering attention. And again, this wasn’t presented as an op-ed but a fact-based piece. 

It was nothing of the sort.

The Daily Caller notes:

Within just four paragraphs, the author claimed that conservatives have used free speech to justify “discrimination against gay couples” and “unlimited campaign spending.” The article went on to suggest that conservatives are only interested in protecting free speech because it advances their policy goals and that free speech disproportionately benefits the powerful in society.

And who does Liptak quote as the ‘defining viewpoint’ regarding alleged conservative ‘weaponization’ of free speech? Why, Supreme Court Associate Justice Elena Kagan, who is one of the high court’s most Left-wing members.

Liptak’s conclusion stems from the high court’s ruling against a favored Left-wing politic faction — unions, and in this case, unions representing state government workers. It seems that when a majority of justices decide that compelling (i.e. forcing) union members to pay dues to an organization which uses the money to support one political party (Democrats) he believes that amounts to “weaponizing the First Amendment.”

As for Kagan, how come liberal SCOTUS justices have ‘speech’ issue when, say, the Koch Brothers voluntarily spend on or otherwise support political campaigns for Republicans, but not when unions force members to speak up on behalf of Democrats when not all of them may support Democrats? Speech should never be forced.

Kagan was also upset that the high court had rejected a California law requiring religiously oriented crisis pregnancy centers to provide women with information about abortion — again, forcing such centers to do that in violation of their religious convictions, which are supposed to be sacrosanct under our Constitution.

Leftists just want to control ALL speech

That’s weaponization of the First Amendment, though. But only to the Left.

Ilya Shapiro, a constitutional lawyer and legal expert with the libertarian Cato Institute, likes that the high court is curbing government and institutional mandates regarding speech issues.

“The libertarian position has become dominant on the right on First Amendment issues,” he said, according to Liptak. “It simply means that we should be skeptical of government attempts to regulate speech. That used to be an uncontroversial and non-ideological point. What’s now being called the libertarian position on speech was, in the 1960s, the liberal position on speech.”

In other words, when the Left used speech to advance it’s political agenda, that’s okay — that’s the intended use of the First Amendment. (Related: Blacks then, Trumpers Now – How the insane, bigoted LEFT treats pro-Trump Americans like a sub-human class of animals.)

But when conservatives and constitutionalists push back against mandated speech, that’s “weaponizing” the First Amendment.

Today, “liberals who once championed expansive first amendment rights are now uneasy about them,” Liptak wrote. Translation: The Left wants to make the rules about when speech is and is not appropriate and to never let conservatives have a seat at that table.

They’re speech Nazis in every sense of the term. And when things don’t go their way on the issue, they want to claim that somehow their loss of control over who can and cannot speak and what must and must not be said is a threat to our liberty.

Our founders envisioned free, robust, and spirited exchanges of ideas — regarding our culture, our society, and our politics. The Left simply wants to control the conversation at all times and when they can’t, they whine.

Read more news about the First Amendment at FirstAmendment.news.

J.D. Heyes is editor of The National Sentinel and a senior writer for Natural News and News Target.

Sources include:



comments powered by Disqus