When I was in law school, one of my professors had us read his book on the First Amendment. One thesis in his book was that the First Amendment, freedom of speech in particular, was intended to protect dissent. This is an oversimplification, but he reasoned that those in the majority, almost by definition, did not need to have their speech protected. We were going to hear the majority view with or without the First Amendment. It was those in the minority, the dissenting views, that were most susceptible to government overreach and most in need of protection. I subscribe to a slightly different theory, namely, that the First Amendment is intended to facilitate a robust exchange of ideas, but that theory depends on dissenting views being part of the exchange.
The United States Has A Tradition Of Dissent
Dissent is in our DNA. Dissenters founded and built our country. Many great advancements in our country were born from questioning the status quo or bucking conventional wisdom. Dissent is critical to our democracy. Listening to dissent, really listening, forces us to self-examine and to sharpen our own thinking. In some cases, dissent might even change or reshape our minds.
The Government Should Welcome Dissent
Whenever a government actor, be it the Executive, the Legislature or the Courts, tries to silence dissent, we should ask First Amendment questions. When government actors try to dictate to our people or our institutions what or how to think or what questions to ask, we should push back. Think Senator Joseph McCarthy and the Red Scare of the 1950’s. Our leaders should not fear dissent or new ideas. They should welcome them and engage with them. Trying to quash dissent is not who we are. We should demand more courage from our leaders.