The First Amendment of the United States protects all forms of free speech and expression that does not intend on hurting or threatening the republic. However, during WW2, and later through the Cold War, the United States government inspired fear in Americans of the circumstances at hand, and later resulted in some of the most egregious restrictions on free speech in our nation's history.
Prior to the Second World War, the worst restrictions on free speech in American history took place in 1798 with the Sedition Act. When the Federalists were fearful of the growing power and influence of the Republicans, they passed a law that banned any speech that was,“false, scandalous and malicious writing," against their party. This restricted press printing information about politics, and many groups were censored and at least 26 people were placed in jail as a result. This ultimately was repealed only once the Jefferson team won the 1800 election and they repealed all parts of the Alien and Sedition Acts except for the Alien Enemies Act.
Fast forward to 1940 and the commencement of the Second World War. The Smith Act, previously known as the Alien Registration Act of 1940, made it a criminal offense for anyone to advocate for overthrowing the government, organize with these groups, or even be a member of any of these groups. This resulted many groups, such as the Communist Party of the United States of America and the Socialist Workers Party, from being able to freely express their political beliefs. Many members were prosecuted and thrown into jail.
For the next seventeen years, Americans were being unfairly prosecuted and imprisoned for their expression of how they believed the United States could be better. But in 1957, the Supreme Court ruled in Yates v. United States that all the people convicted under the Smith Act would be reverse their convictions and have their cases retried. Furthermore, they demanded a new level of strict scrutiny, and they also wanted to ask for a clear difference between the force to overthrow a specific principle versus overthrowing the actual government.
After the Smith Act was reversed, the United States finally allowed clear expression of their opinions on the government. This did increase the amount of vocal support of Communism in the United States through the 60s, and in many ways, this act proved that the Supreme Court was in favor of the people speaking freely about how they can make the government better, setting a precedent for the culmination of the Civil Rights Movement.
Sources:
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1956/6
https://www.britannica.com/event/Smith-Act
http://www.history.com/topics/alien-and-sedition-acts
Even though the US was not technically at war during the Cold War, the country seemed more like a military state because of the freedoms people gave up for the promise of security: people gave up freedom of speech, and many gave up their own privacy. The CIA, in its investigations of Soviet Spy rings, would questions just about anybody, including a suspect's friends, neighbors, and family. When a country really is in a state of war (or when its people feel like they are, as during the Cold War), then people are more lenient with giving up liberties, so it wasn't until 1957, as you said, that the Supreme Court started questioning infringing practices.
ReplyDeleteIntriguing post, although it is saddening. We pride ourselves on being the "land of the free", yet we imprison those who are different, even if it goes against our constitution. We just learned about Minersville v. Gobitis, where two children Jehovah's Witness faith refused to salute the flag in school due to religious reasons. They were forced to by the Supreme Court, and later expelled by the school district. Today, we see a similar example where Jack Phillips refuses to create an artful wedding cake for a gay couple, arguing that it goes against his religion. He would sell them off-the-shelf items, but he doesn't want to create a piece of art celebrating something against his beliefs. His argument is that he should not be forced to create speech against his beliefs. Just as people have been imprisoned for speaking up in the name of freedom (despite the constitution), there is now an issue of people being prosecuted for not supporting equality for all.
ReplyDeleteFree speech is great, but it sure is complicated.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/04/opinion/first-amendment-wedding-cake.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FFirst%20Amendment%20(US%20Constitution)&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=3&pgtype=collection