-
Freedom for the Thought That We Hate
- A Biography of the First Amendment
- Narrado por: Stow Lovejoy
- Duración: 5 h y 49 m
No se pudo agregar al carrito
Add to Cart failed.
Error al Agregar a Lista de Deseos.
Error al eliminar de la lista de deseos.
Error al añadir a tu biblioteca
Error al seguir el podcast
Error al dejar de seguir el podcast
![Prime logotipo](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/G/01/Audible/Homestead/Prime_Logo_RGB.png)
Compra ahora por $19.95
No default payment method selected.
We are sorry. We are not allowed to sell this product with the selected payment method
Grandes primeros Títulos
![The Mueller Report Audiolibro Por The Washington Post arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51OoQOlCV1L._SL240_.jpg)
![Chip War Audiolibro Por Chris Miller arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41V3bkjM1RL._SL240_.jpg)
![The Conservative Sensibility Audiolibro Por George F. Will arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/31-A2D02mBL._SL240_.jpg)
![Where Law Ends Audiolibro Por Andrew Weissmann arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41bmqX0Qm+L._SL240_.jpg)
![Tracers in the Dark Audiolibro Por Andy Greenberg arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41tJZ8uU8oL._SL240_.jpg)
![A Republic, If You Can Keep It Audiolibro Por Neil Gorsuch arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51DENa6G2iL._SL240_.jpg)
![Hatchet Man Audiolibro Por Elie Honig arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51dscFLpbRS._SL240_.jpg)
![Get Trump Audiolibro Por Alan Dershowitz arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41BtYc+WfzL._SL240_.jpg)
![Separate Audiolibro Por Steve Luxenberg arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51qP5AOiHLL._SL240_.jpg)
![The Quartet Audiolibro Por Joseph J. Ellis arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51ARVozbuOL._SL240_.jpg)
![The Case Against Impeaching Trump Audiolibro Por Alan Dershowitz arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41JnNQz-IyL._SL240_.jpg)
![Without Precedent Audiolibro Por Joel Richard Paul arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51OqLxS034L._SL240_.jpg)
![The Most Dangerous Branch Audiolibro Por David A. Kaplan arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51i3edQRkbL._SL240_.jpg)
![Impeachment Audiolibro Por Jon Meacham, Timothy Naftali, Peter Baker, Jeffrey A. Engel arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41Yy53DRFkL._SL240_.jpg)
![Worse than Nothing Audiolibro Por Erwin Chemerinsky arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/416NHAQdftL._SL240_.jpg)
![A People's History of the Supreme Court Audiolibro Por Peter Irons, Howard Zinn - foreword arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51P1tBOzKnL._SL240_.jpg)
![Law 101 Audiolibro Por Jay M. Feinman arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51gzRqi-P0L._SL240_.jpg)
![The History of the Supreme Court Audiolibro Por Peter Irons, The Great Courses arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41+HkDTUytL._SL240_.jpg)
![Kindly Inquisitors Audiolibro Por Jonathan Rauch arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41n47F8FmzL._SL240_.jpg)
![Privacy, Property, and Free Speech: Law and the Constitution in the 21st Century Audiolibro Por Jeffrey Rosen, The Great Courses arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/410RvnPWTML._SL240_.jpg)
![Eichmann in Jerusalem Audiolibro Por Hannah Arendt arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51hk-B-2nhL._SL240_.jpg)
![The Constitution Today Audiolibro Por Akhil Reed Amar arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51pFPGArzwL._SL240_.jpg)
![The Supremes' Greatest Hits, 2nd Revised & Updated Edition Audiolibro Por Michael G. Trachtman arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51IMmrou7AL._SL240_.jpg)
![The Great Dissent Audiolibro Por Thomas Healy arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51Slqp5Y9FL._SL240_.jpg)
![The Case Against the Democratic House Impeaching Trump Audiolibro Por Alan Dershowitz arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/413waDOeg3L._SL240_.jpg)
![Dissent and the Supreme Court Audiolibro Por Melvin I. Urofsky arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61amIWrBwoL._SL240_.jpg)
![The Soul of the First Amendment Audiolibro Por Floyd Abrams arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41qJ9r3GjKL._SL240_.jpg)
![The Nine Audiolibro Por Jeffrey Toobin arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51GQdVeoJsL._SL240_.jpg)
![Gideon's Trumpet Audiolibro Por Anthony Lewis arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41ipRPrMQjL._SL240_.jpg)
![Scalia Dissents Audiolibro Por Antonin Scalia arte de portada](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51VfEXkj-eL._SL240_.jpg)
Resumen del Editor
In Lewis' telling, the story of how the right of free expression evolved along with our nation makes a compelling case for the adaptability of our constitution. Although Americans have gleefully and sometimes outrageously exercised their right to free speech since before the nation's founding, the Supreme Court did not begin to recognize this right until 1919. Freedom of speech and the press as we know it today is surprisingly recent.
Anthony Lewis tells us how these rights were created, revealing a story of hard choices, heroic (and some less heroic) judges, and fascinating and eccentric defendants who forced the legal system to come face-to-face with one of America's great founding ideas.
Reseñas de la Crítica
Relacionado con este tema
-
The Case Against the Democratic House Impeaching Trump
- De: Alan Dershowitz
- Narrado por: Jim Seybert
- Duración: 9 h y 52 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
In the 2018 best seller The Case Against Impeaching Trump, Alan Dershowitz lamented how American political discourse has devolved into hypocrisy and the criminalization of political differences. Arguments to impeach Trump failed Dershowitz’s “shoe on the other foot test”, or his political golden rule: Democrats must do unto Republicans what they would have Republicans do unto them, and vice versa. Since then, we’ve only become more divided. The Case Against the Democratic House Impeaching Trump includes and expands upon Dershowitz’s 2018 book.
-
-
Excellent
- De Amazon Customer en 06-01-19
De: Alan Dershowitz
-
The Supremes' Greatest Hits, 2nd Revised & Updated Edition
- The 44 Supreme Court Cases That Most Directly Affect Your Life
- De: Michael G. Trachtman
- Narrado por: Jonathan Yen
- Duración: 7 h y 20 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
The Supreme Court's rulings have shaped American life and justice and allowed Americans to retain basic freedoms such as privacy, free speech, and the right to a fair trial. This revised and updated edition of Michael G. Trachtman's riveting work includes 10 important cases from 2010 to 2015.
-
-
Nice review overall.
- De "freeindeed4ever" en 02-10-20
-
The Constitution Today
- Timeless Lessons for the Issues of Our Era
- De: Akhil Reed Amar
- Narrado por: Mike Chamberlain
- Duración: 19 h y 41 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
When the stories that lead our daily news involve momentous constitutional questions, present-minded journalists and busy citizens cannot always see the stakes clearly. In The Constitution Today, Akhil Reed Amar, America's preeminent constitutional scholar, considers the biggest and most bitterly contested debates of the last two decades. He shows how the Constitution's text, history, and structure are a crucial repository of collective wisdom, providing specific rules and grand themes relevant to every organ of the American body politic.
-
-
Amar is a Brilliant Arguer
- De MJ Schirmer en 11-16-16
De: Akhil Reed Amar
-
Scorpions
- The Battles and Triumphs of FDR's Great Supreme Court Justices
- De: Noah Feldman
- Narrado por: Cotter Smith
- Duración: 14 h y 38 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
They began as close allies and friends of FDR, but the quest to shape a new Constitution led them to competition and sometimes outright warfare. Scorpions tells the story of four great justices: their relationship with Roosevelt, with each other, and with the turbulent world of the Great Depression, World War II, and the Cold War. It also serves as a history of the modern Constitution itself.
-
-
A MOST HONOURABLE SWANSONG
- De Dudley H. Williams en 05-27-12
De: Noah Feldman
-
Impeachment
- An American History
- De: Jon Meacham, Timothy Naftali, Peter Baker, y otros
- Narrado por: Fred Sanders
- Duración: 7 h y 54 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
Impeachment is a double-edged sword. Though it was designed to check tyrants, Thomas Jefferson also called impeachment “the most formidable weapon for the purpose of a dominant faction that was ever contrived”. On the one hand, it nullifies the will of voters, the basic foundation of all representative democracies. On the other, its absence from the Constitution would leave the country vulnerable to despotic leadership.
-
-
May not scratch your personal itch, but read it anyway!
- De Marshall en 11-17-18
De: Jon Meacham, y otros
-
A People's History of the Supreme Court
- The Men and Women Whose Cases and Decisions Have Shaped Our Constitution
- De: Peter Irons, Howard Zinn - foreword
- Narrado por: David Drummond
- Duración: 28 h y 32 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
A comprehensive history of the people and cases that have changed history, this is the definitive account of the nation's highest court.
-
-
Really enjoyed this book
- De Paul en 02-19-20
De: Peter Irons, y otros
-
The Case Against the Democratic House Impeaching Trump
- De: Alan Dershowitz
- Narrado por: Jim Seybert
- Duración: 9 h y 52 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
In the 2018 best seller The Case Against Impeaching Trump, Alan Dershowitz lamented how American political discourse has devolved into hypocrisy and the criminalization of political differences. Arguments to impeach Trump failed Dershowitz’s “shoe on the other foot test”, or his political golden rule: Democrats must do unto Republicans what they would have Republicans do unto them, and vice versa. Since then, we’ve only become more divided. The Case Against the Democratic House Impeaching Trump includes and expands upon Dershowitz’s 2018 book.
-
-
Excellent
- De Amazon Customer en 06-01-19
De: Alan Dershowitz
-
The Supremes' Greatest Hits, 2nd Revised & Updated Edition
- The 44 Supreme Court Cases That Most Directly Affect Your Life
- De: Michael G. Trachtman
- Narrado por: Jonathan Yen
- Duración: 7 h y 20 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
The Supreme Court's rulings have shaped American life and justice and allowed Americans to retain basic freedoms such as privacy, free speech, and the right to a fair trial. This revised and updated edition of Michael G. Trachtman's riveting work includes 10 important cases from 2010 to 2015.
-
-
Nice review overall.
- De "freeindeed4ever" en 02-10-20
-
The Constitution Today
- Timeless Lessons for the Issues of Our Era
- De: Akhil Reed Amar
- Narrado por: Mike Chamberlain
- Duración: 19 h y 41 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
When the stories that lead our daily news involve momentous constitutional questions, present-minded journalists and busy citizens cannot always see the stakes clearly. In The Constitution Today, Akhil Reed Amar, America's preeminent constitutional scholar, considers the biggest and most bitterly contested debates of the last two decades. He shows how the Constitution's text, history, and structure are a crucial repository of collective wisdom, providing specific rules and grand themes relevant to every organ of the American body politic.
-
-
Amar is a Brilliant Arguer
- De MJ Schirmer en 11-16-16
De: Akhil Reed Amar
-
Scorpions
- The Battles and Triumphs of FDR's Great Supreme Court Justices
- De: Noah Feldman
- Narrado por: Cotter Smith
- Duración: 14 h y 38 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
They began as close allies and friends of FDR, but the quest to shape a new Constitution led them to competition and sometimes outright warfare. Scorpions tells the story of four great justices: their relationship with Roosevelt, with each other, and with the turbulent world of the Great Depression, World War II, and the Cold War. It also serves as a history of the modern Constitution itself.
-
-
A MOST HONOURABLE SWANSONG
- De Dudley H. Williams en 05-27-12
De: Noah Feldman
-
Impeachment
- An American History
- De: Jon Meacham, Timothy Naftali, Peter Baker, y otros
- Narrado por: Fred Sanders
- Duración: 7 h y 54 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
Impeachment is a double-edged sword. Though it was designed to check tyrants, Thomas Jefferson also called impeachment “the most formidable weapon for the purpose of a dominant faction that was ever contrived”. On the one hand, it nullifies the will of voters, the basic foundation of all representative democracies. On the other, its absence from the Constitution would leave the country vulnerable to despotic leadership.
-
-
May not scratch your personal itch, but read it anyway!
- De Marshall en 11-17-18
De: Jon Meacham, y otros
-
A People's History of the Supreme Court
- The Men and Women Whose Cases and Decisions Have Shaped Our Constitution
- De: Peter Irons, Howard Zinn - foreword
- Narrado por: David Drummond
- Duración: 28 h y 32 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
A comprehensive history of the people and cases that have changed history, this is the definitive account of the nation's highest court.
-
-
Really enjoyed this book
- De Paul en 02-19-20
De: Peter Irons, y otros
-
The Majesty of the Law
- Reflections of a Supreme Court Justice
- De: Sandra Day O'Connor
- Narrado por: Bernadette Dunne
- Duración: 9 h y 30 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
In this remarkable book, Sandra Day O’Connor explores the law, her life as a Supreme Court Justice, and how the Court has evolved and continues to function, grow, and change as an American institution. Tracing some of the origins of American law through history, people, ideas, and landmark cases, O’Connor sheds new light on the basics, exploring through personal observation the evolution of the Court and American democratic traditions.
-
-
Informative and well-written
- De James en 07-11-05
-
To End a Presidency
- De: Laurence Tribe, Joshua Matz
- Narrado por: L. J. Ganser, Laurence Tribe - preface
- Duración: 10 h y 15 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
The history and future of our democracy's ultimate sanction, presidential impeachment, and a guide to how it should be used now. To End a Presidency addresses one of today's most urgent questions: when and whether to impeach a president. Laurence Tribe and Joshua Matz provide an authoritative guide to impeachment's past and a bold argument about its proper role today. In an era of expansive presidential power and intense partisanship, we must rethink impeachment for the 21st century.
-
-
A Primer on Impeachment and our Present Dilemma
- De J.B. en 05-20-18
De: Laurence Tribe, y otros
-
The Supreme Court
- The Personalities and Rivalries That Defined America
- De: Jeffrey Rosen
- Narrado por: Alan Sklar
- Duración: 8 h y 43 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
A leading Supreme Court expert recounts the personal and philosophical rivalries that forged our nation's highest court and continue to shape our daily lives. The Supreme Court is the most mysterious branch of government, and yet the Court is at root a human institution, made up of very bright people with very strong egos, for whom political and judicial conflicts often become personal.
-
-
Overruled!
- De Stephen McLeod en 08-23-08
De: Jeffrey Rosen
-
Trigger Warning: Is the Fear of Being Offensive Killing Free Speech?
- De: Mick Hume
- Narrado por: Steven Crossley
- Duración: 11 h y 45 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
In this blistering polemic, veteran journalist Mick Hume presents an uncompromising defence of freedom of expression, which he argues is threatened in the West not by jackbooted censorship but by a creeping culture of conformism and you-can't-say-that. The cold-blooded murder of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists in January 2015 brought a deadly focus to the issue of free speech. Leaders of the free-thinking world united in condemning the killings, proclaiming ‘Je suis Charlie'.
-
-
Think While It's Still Legal...
- De Douglas en 12-13-16
De: Mick Hume
-
Gideon's Trumpet
- How One Man, a Poor Prisoner, Took His Case to the Supreme Court - and Changed the Law of the United States
- De: Anthony Lewis
- Narrado por: Robertson Dean
- Duración: 7 h y 50 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
A history of the landmark case of Clarence Earl Gideon's fight for the right to legal counsel.
-
-
best book on the subject
- De J.B. Price en 06-12-18
De: Anthony Lewis
-
Liberty's First Crisis
- Adams, Jefferson, and the Misfits Who Saved Free Speech
- De: Charles Slack
- Narrado por: Brian Holsopple
- Duración: 9 h y 36 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
When the United States government passed the Bill of Rights in 1791, its uncompromising protection of speech and of the press were unlike anything the world had ever seen before. But by 1798, the once-dazzling young republic of the United States was on the verge of collapse. Suddenly, the First Amendment, which protected harsh commentary of the weak government, no longer seemed as practical. So that July, President John Adams and the Federalists in control of Congress passed an extreme piece of legislation that made criticism of the government and its leaders a crime.
-
-
Marvelous Book....
- De Douglas en 01-07-17
De: Charles Slack
-
Broken Government
- How Republican Rule Destroyed the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branches
- De: John W. Dean
- Narrado por: Paul Michael
- Duración: 10 h y 5 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
In his eighth book, Dean takes the broadest and deepest view yet of the dysfunctional chaos and institutional damage that the Republican Party and its core conservatives have inflicted on the federal government. He assesses the state of all three branches of government, tracing their decline through the presidencies of Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II.
-
-
Attention Policy Wonks - This is the book for you
- De Neal en 09-19-09
De: John W. Dean
-
The Great Dissent
- How Oliver Wendell Holmes Changed His Mind and Changed the History of Free Speech in America
- De: Thomas Healy
- Narrado por: Danny Campbell
- Duración: 10 h y 20 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
Free speech as we know it comes less from the First Amendment than from a most unexpected source: Supreme Court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. A lifelong skeptic, he disdained all individual rights, including the right to express one's political views. But in 1919, it was Holmes who wrote a dissenting opinion that would become the canonical affirmation of free speech in the United States.
-
-
How a 78 year old man can learn & change his mind
- De Jean en 09-23-13
De: Thomas Healy
-
Free Speech
- A History from Socrates to Social Media
- De: Jacob Mchangama
- Narrado por: Fajer Al-Kaisi
- Duración: 13 h y 24 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
Hailed as the “first freedom”, free speech is the bedrock of democracy. But it is a challenging principle, subject to erosion in times of upheaval. Today, in democracies and authoritarian states around the world, it is on the retreat. In Free Speech, Jacob Mchangama traces the riveting legal, political, and cultural history of this idea.
-
-
Great review of free speech and history
- De Anonymous User en 02-22-22
De: Jacob Mchangama
-
The Case for Impeachment
- De: Allan J. Lichtman
- Narrado por: Dan Woren
- Duración: 6 h y 32 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
What are the ranges and limitations of presidential authority? What are the standards of truthfulness that a president must uphold? What will it take to impeach Donald J. Trump? Professor Allan J. Lichtman, who has correctly forecasted 30 years of presidential outcomes, answers these questions, and more, in The Case for Impeachment - a deeply convincing argument for impeaching the 45th president of the United States.
-
-
Every American should read this!
- De Daniel Ballard en 04-24-17
-
Making Our Democracy Work
- A Judge’s View
- De: Justice Stephen Breyer
- Narrado por: Luis Moreno
- Duración: 10 h y 17 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer delivers an impassioned argument for the proper role of America’s highest judicial body. Examining historic and contemporary decisions by the Court, Breyer highlights the rulings that have bolstered public confidence as well as the missteps that have triggered distrust. What emerges is a unique approach - certain to be admired for years to come - to interpreting the Constitution.
-
-
Timely
- De Don en 05-17-17
-
The Bill of Rights Primer
- A Citizen's Guidebook to the American Bill of Rights
- De: Akhil Reed Amar, Les Adams
- Narrado por: Tim Lundeen
- Duración: 8 h y 5 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
Many Americans reference the Bill of Rights, a document that represents many of the freedoms that define the United States. Who doesn’t know about the First Amendment’s freedom of religion or Second Amendment’s right to bear arms? In this succinct volume, Akhil Reed Amar and Les Adams offer a wealth of knowledge about the Bill of Rights that goes beyond a basic understanding.The Bill of Rights Primer is an authoritative guide to all American freedoms. Uncluttered and well-organized, this audiobook is perfect for those who want to study up on the Bill of Rights without needing a law degree to do so.
-
-
At this length, basic; but at that, great
- De Philo en 06-10-15
De: Akhil Reed Amar, y otros
Lo que los oyentes dicen sobre Freedom for the Thought That We Hate
Calificaciones medias de los clientesReseñas - Selecciona las pestañas a continuación para cambiar el origen de las reseñas.
-
Total
- D. Littman
- 06-07-08
alittle choppy but nevertheless interesting
I love Anthony Lewis' work, as a nonfiction writer and as a NYT journalist. And I love the analytical puzzle that characterizes most works on constitutional law, including the history of the First Amendment. This book may be a good introduction to that subject, for someone not already versed in many of the cases Lewis' summarizes in the work, a first step rather than a last step in the intellectual exploration of the First Amendment, the Supreme Court & the Federal Appeals courts. But it is not a very satisfying book for someone familiar with the issues already and hoping for an in-depth discussion of some constitutional issues & the underlying cases (in part as a human interest story).
The book is well narrated and moves along nicely. However it did seem to lack clear organization and in some places was excessively superficial.
Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.
Has calificado esta reseña.
Reportaste esta reseña
esto le resultó útil a 5 personas
-
Total
- Flavius Krakdaddius
- 06-10-10
Well-researched, but suffers from its biases.
This book is well-written and engaging. Moreover, the author has clearly researched and thought dilligently about the topic.
However, the book loses much when Lewis wears his politics on his sleeve. This causes him to overemphasize some freedom of speech issues, while glossing over others.
Recommended, but read critically.
Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.
Has calificado esta reseña.
Reportaste esta reseña
esto le resultó útil a 1 persona
-
Total
-
Ejecución
-
Historia
- Dudley H. Williams
- 12-21-11
Freedom of Expression: 163 years of Solitude
This Audiobook is a tour de force of its subject matter. It traverses what would have been an arcane topic in an accessible and easy to understand manner. Although breath-taking and awe-inspiring, the simplicity in which the content is conveyed makes it informative and highly recommendable.
The First Amendment provides that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or press. I’ll discuss some of those Supreme Court opinions Lewis has brought to life in this book.
In Ch.2 Lewis deals with the Sedition Act of 1798 which made punishable utterances deemed detrimental to the Government, House or President. Three of the presiding officers in prosecutions under the Act were Supreme Court Judges. Given the standing of these Judges (who also brought out convictions), the constitutionality of the Act would almost surely have been upheld in the Supreme Court. It was only in 1964, in NYT v Sullivan that the Supreme Court pronounced upon the validity of the Act — 163 years after the date set down in the Act itself for its expiration, to wit March, 3 1801.
Ch. 3 introduces Patterson v Colorado in which Justice Holmes dismissed a First Amendment defence and upheld a conviction of contempt of court where the defendant had criticised a Judge. In 1917 Congress enacted the Espionage Act which in 1919 led to 3 Supreme Court First Amendment judgments, all by Justice Holmes.
Schenck is judicially of the most importance. In affirming the defendant’s conviction, Justice Holmes made a statement of perennial impact: “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.” Holmes gave the following formula for deciding these cases: “The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.” Lewis says that these “Delphic Words”, have been scrutinised for generations by scholars.
Three great dissenting judgments were delivered between 1919 and 1929 by Justices Holmes and Brandeis. This “remarkable pair” (as Lewis calls them) would shape the Supreme Court opinions on the First Amendment profoundly in later years.
Abrams v US (1919): Justice Clarke, for the majority, dismissed the First Amendment arguments and affirmed the conviction. Justice Holmes (with Justice Brandeis) held that he never had any reason to doubt that the questions of law before the Court in Schenck, Frohwerk and Debs and he confirmed that they had been rightly decided. Holmes said that he didn’t doubt that the Government constitutionally may punish speech that produces or is intended to produce a clear and “imminent” danger that it will bring about “forthwith” certain substantive evils. The words I have put in inverted commas don’t appear in the so-called “Delphic Words” of the Schenck decision quoted above.
Holmes said that “nobody can suppose that the surreptitious publishing of a silly leaflet by an unknown man, without more, would present any immediate danger that its opinions would hinder the success of the government arms or have any appreciable tendency to do so.” Therefore the harsh sentences of 20 years have been imposed for the publishing of 2 leaflets that the defendants had as much right to publish as the Government had to publish the Constitution now vainly invoked by them. Lewis elaborates on this apparent about turn by Holmes and gives possible explanations for this, but in essence, the mystery remains.
Whitney v California (1927): Justice Brandeis wrote the dissenting opinion, regarded by many as the greatest judicial statement of the case for freedom of speech. Brandeis said that those who won independence believed that freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth; that without free speech and assembly discussion would be futile; that with them, discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine, that public discussion is a political duty, that this should be a fundamental principle of the government, that the path of safety lies in the opportunity to discuss freely supposed grievances and proposed remedies, that recognizing the occasional tyrannies of governing majorities, they amended the Constitution so that free speech and assembly should be guaranteed. The Governor of CA pardoned Whitney, quoting Brandeis’ dissent at length in his pardon message.
US v Schwimmer (1929): Lewis relates that, when he was reporting on the Supreme Court for the NYT around 1960, he was talking to Justice Frankfurter in his Chambers. The Judge handed him the report of the Holmes dissent in US v Schwimmer. Lewis read the opinion and when he came to the paragraph ending with the words “Sermon on the Mount” he felt his hair rise at the back of his neck.
Justice Holmes said: “Some of her answers might excite popular prejudice, but if there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of free thought—not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate. I think that we should adhere to that principle with regard to admission into, as well as to life within this country. And recurring to the opinion that bars this applicant's way, I would suggest that the Quakers have done their share to make the country what it is, that many citizens agree with the applicant's belief and that I had not supposed hitherto that we regretted our inability to expel them because they believed more than some of us do in the teachings of the Sermon on the Mount.”
Ch. 4 contains Stromberg v CA (1931) in which the majority for the first time upheld a First Amendment defence. Having enforced it as law, the Court faced the challenge of defining from case to case what the words of the Amendment meant. Giving concrete meaning to its all-embracing words was a daunting and endless job, as restrictions in some cases inevitably had to be imposed on the freedom of expression. Words that were not liberally spoken or printed have been given protection as in the Stromberg case where the defendant was not prosecuted for uttering words, but for carrying a red flag — held to be “symbolic speech” and given First Amendment protection.
In Near v Minnesota (1931 ) the ban on an Anti-Semitic publication was overturned on First Amendment grounds. This decision was regarded as a great bulwark of press freedom, and it is because of this judgment that it is now very difficult to convince a Judge to issue a PRIOR restraint on the press. Although the court held that remedies for libel remained available and unaffected, this decision freed the author of a damaging statement from proving the truth of a statement made BEFORE publication.
In NYT v US (1971) the NYT published top secret documents (the Pentagon Papers) from a secret official history of the still on-going Vietnam War. Pres. Nixon alleged that the documents threatened national security. The Supreme ordered that the NYT could resume publication.
NYT v Sullivan (1964) deals with a libel suit AFTER publication. The Court was required to determine for the first time the extent to which the constitutional protections for speech and press limit a State's power to award damages in a libel action brought by a public official against critics of his official conduct. At the time of the Sullivan case there were certain evidentiary presumptions favouring the defendant in a libel suit. The NYT couldn’t discharge the presumption of proving the truth of its publication in all material respects and the trial Judge found that the allegations were thus libellous. The NYT appealed to the Supreme Court. Until then libel had always been regarded as outside the protection of the First Amendment and no libel judgment had ever been found to violate the guarantees freedom of speech and press. Counsel for the NYT set upon the unenviable task of requesting the Supreme Court to reverse a long chained course of legal history — a route the Court had always been reluctant to follow.
The defence argued that the law, which prohibited criticism of public officials, should be compared to the Sedition Act of 1798 and that the Court should declare this Act unconstitutional. Justice Brennan held that the court considered this case against the background of a profound national commitment to the principle that “debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.” Justice Brennan said that the Sedition Act “first crystalized a national awareness of the central meaning of the First Amendment.” Thus the Act was found to violate the First Amendment 1963 years after its expiry date..
In Ch. 6 Lewis asks whether journalists have a constitutional privilege unavailable to others. He considers Branzburg v Hayes (1972)— the first Supreme Court judgment on a press privilege claim. At issue was whether requiring newsmen to appear and testify before grand juries abridges the right to freedom of speech and press. Justice White, for the majority, held that it did not. Although news gathering may be thus hampered, the press is anyway regularly excluded from grand jury proceedings, Supreme Court conferences, meetings of other official bodies gathered in executive session, and meetings of private organizations.
Justice Powell concurred but held that a newsman is not without remedy if he believed that the grand jury investigation wasn’t being conducted in good faith or if the information sought only bears a remote and tenuous relationship to the subject of the investigation. Judges should consider these matters on a case by case basis. Many lower courts read Justice Powell’s opinion as effectively modifying Justice White’s flat rejection of a journalist’s privilege claim.
In Ch. 7 deals with the culture of fear under various Statutes which criminalises acts against organised institutions. In Gitlow v People (1925) the defendant was convicted of criminal anarchy. The majority of the Court dismissed the First Amendment argument and affirmed the conviction. However, the Court for the first time held that that freedom of speech and of the press protected by the First Amendment, are among the fundamental personal rights and 'liberties' protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment by the States. The court concluded that previous case law to the effect that the Fourteenth Amendment imposed no restrictions on States concerning freedom of speech, was not determinative of this question.
In De Jonge V Oregon (1937) the defendant helped to conduct a meeting held under the auspices of the Communist Party. The sole basis for the conviction was that CP had called the meeting. There was no charge that a criminal syndicalism or violence was conducted at the meeting. The Supreme Court overturned the conviction in a unanimous decision. Hughes CJ did not apply the “clear and present danger” test but relied solely on the question as to whether or not there was a violation of freedom of speech or assembly protected by the First Amendment. Hughes stated that the right of peaceable assembly is a right cognate to those of free speech and free press, and is equally fundamental.
Ch. 8 deals with Cohen v CA in which the defendant was convicted for walking through the corridors of a court wearing a jacket on which was visibly inscribed the words: “F *** the Draft”. Justice Harlan, in upholding the defendant's right to freedom of expression said: “One man’s vulgarity, is another man’s lyric.”
In Ch. 9 Lewis examines the tolerance, apparently unique to US jurisprudence, surrounding “Hate Speech”. In Brandenburg v Ohiio (1969) the defendant, a KKK member, said: “Personally, I believe the n----r should be returned to Africa, the Jew returned to Israel.” The Supreme Court held that his words were protected by the First Amendment.
Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.
Has calificado esta reseña.
Reportaste esta reseña
esto le resultó útil a 6 personas
-
Total
- Roy
- 04-12-09
The First Amendment Lives
This is the well written and expertly read book by Pulitzer Prize columnist Anthony Lewis about the First Amendement of the US Constitution. Lewis places the Amendment in historical contest, relates key cases which have shifted the meaning and interpretation of the amendment over the years, and helps the novice to Constitutional law better understand its meaning. The book is peppered with stories which illustrate the flow of high court thinking and judgements. Along the way tangential events and cases involving freedom of the press, privacy and other issues are explored in light of the First Amendment.
The author has a definite ax to grind so far as the second Bush administration is concerned, but this does not detract from the over all value of the book. Positively, the book compares Freedom of Speech as practiced in the US with the British tradition as well as others which is very interesting.
This is a book well worth the time of all who enjoy freedom of speech. It will be interesting to everyone taking the time to listen.
Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.
Has calificado esta reseña.
Reportaste esta reseña
esto le resultó útil a 5 personas
-
Total
-
Ejecución
-
Historia
- Kimjongbill
- 03-31-15
Free Speech Still A Radical Idea!
Great review of the origins of the first amendment to its current protections. Especially helpful reviews of formative case law marking new definitions for what is protected from infringement.
Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.
Has calificado esta reseña.
Reportaste esta reseña
esto le resultó útil a 1 persona
-
Total
- Craig A. Godeke
- 07-25-10
Good historical overview.
This is a good introduction to the First Amendment and how it has evolved with the United States. It reveals the fact that the founding fathers were never in complete agreement on major issues and continued to debate them even after inking their historical documents.
There are perhaps a few too many instances where the author expresses his personal viewpoint, but at least it is done transparently.
The reading is flat and dull, and I take one star away for that reason.
Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.
Has calificado esta reseña.
Reportaste esta reseña
esto le resultó útil a 2 personas
-
Total
- Joanne
- 08-29-10
Scholarly work
I enjoyed this book and learned a great deal. However it was quite dense and I had to listen to it more than once to fully absorb what was discussed.
Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.
Has calificado esta reseña.
Reportaste esta reseña
esto le resultó útil a 1 persona
-
Total
-
Ejecución
-
Historia
- Marcus
- 06-04-16
Liberty of Expression and Democracy
Liberty of thought and liberty of expression are essential in modern democracies. The path to the implementation of the first amendment and the meanings it assumes in American Law are explained in this book. The author refers U.S. Supreme Court decisions to elaborate in the matter, reflecting about liberty of speech, liberty of expression and freedom of the press. The understanding of this constitutional right, so argues Anthony Lewis, evolves through time, broadening it's scope. Specially attention is gave to the opinions of Justice Oliver W. Holmes, to whom the author attributed a major contribution to the realization of the first amendment. This is a readable book that deals with an important question in modern societies.
Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.
Has calificado esta reseña.
Reportaste esta reseña
esto le resultó útil a 1 persona
-
Total
-
Ejecución
-
Historia
- ASweetOldMan
- 04-25-21
Unbiased and Well-Written
The author does a very good job of examining a large assortment of cases while providing the backstory. He seems to be very unbiased. The few times he does interject his opinion, he makes it clear. As a result, it has swayed my position on a few things by presenting things clearly and honestly while not actually TRYING to sway the reader's view. I get the impression that he only interjects his opinion when he has given something a lot of thought, but can't fully connect the dots on something, and so he points out those discrepancies. Highly recommended!
Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.
Has calificado esta reseña.
Reportaste esta reseña
-
Total
- patrick k.
- 06-04-10
slightly stale
After the first 2 hours, I was ready for it to be completed. I found my self jumping around on the track. I listened to the whole thing, but it was like being at the doctors office in a waiting room. Your just ready for your turn.
Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.
Has calificado esta reseña.
Reportaste esta reseña
esto le resultó útil a 4 personas