From Jefferson to Brandeis: The First Amendment, the Declaration, and the Constitution – National Constitution Center
These remarks were delivered by Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center,at a May 2, 2022, celebration of the newly installed marble First Amendment tablet, donated to the National Constitution Center by the Freedom Forum. Its design and installation was made possible through the generosity of Judge J. Michael Luttig and Elizabeth Luttig.
Thank you, Judge [J. Michael] Luttig, for your gift to America in bringing the First Amendment Tablet to Philadelphia. Its fitting that the 45 words of the First Amendment will shine forever over Independence Hall, where the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were drafted. As we prepare to dedicate the Tablet, lets gaze together at Independence Hall and then turn our attention back to the words of the Tablet that are shining before us. Holding these two images in our minds is illuminating, because the First Amendment shows us the connection between the Declaration and the Constitution. It protects freedom of conscience, which the Founders considered first among the unalienable rights enshrined in the Preamble to the Declaration and first among the blessings of liberty enshrined in the Preamble to the Constitution.
How do we know that the rights of conscience, as the Founders called them, were first among the unalienable rights and the blessings of liberty recognized by the Declaration and the Constitution? We know that from two other sacred texts Id like to talk to you about now, as we dedicate the First Amendment Tablet together. Those text are Thomas Jeffersons Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom in Virginia, drafted in 1777, and Justice Brandeiss opinion in Whitney v. California, drafted in 1927.
Jefferson drafted his bill in Virginia months after he returned Philadelphia, where he had just completed the Declaration of Independence. He considered his Religious Freedom Bill among the three accomplishments of his life important enough to be inscribed on his tombstone, along with his having drafted the Declaration and founded the University of Virginia.
Under Virginias colonial religious code, all dissenters were required to support and attend the Established Anglican church. Presbyterians and Baptists could be arrested for practicing their faith or preaching the gospel. Quakers, Jews, and other dissenters could be denied the freedom to marry or to have custody of their children. Jefferson proposed not only to disestablish the Anglican Church and remove all criminal punishments for dissent, but also to prohibit all compelled support for religion of any kind. He concluded that because freedom of conscience is a fundamental right, government can regulate overt acts against peace and good order, but it lacks all power to intrude into the field of opinion.
Jeffersons Bill sets out four reasons why government can make no law that constrains our freedom of speech, conscience, or opinion. Those four reasons were summed up by Justice Brandeis in Whitney, and they have been further developed by the Supreme Court since then:
1. Freedom of conscience is an unalienable right because people can only think for themselves;
2. Free speech makes representatives accountable to We the People;
3. Free speech is necessary for the discovery of truth and the rejection of falsehood;
4. Free speech allows the public discussion necessary for democratic self government.
Lets review each of Jeffersons four reasons.
1. Freedom of conscience is an unalienable right
Well aware that the opinions and belief of men depend not on their own will, but follow involuntarily the evidence proposed to their minds, Jefferson wrote in the first sentence of his draft, God hath created the mind free,and manifested his supreme will that free it shall remain by making it altogether insusceptible of restraint. In other words, Jefferson argued, freedom of conscience is, by definition, an unalienable right one that cant be alienated or surrendered to government because our opinions are the involuntary result of the evidence contemplated by our reasoning minds. We cant give presidents, priests, teachers, or fellow citizens the power to think for us, even if we wanted to, because we are endowed as human beings with the capacity to reason and therefore cant help thinking for ourselves. We know that Madison, the drafter of the First Amendment, shared Jeffersons views because he echoed them in his Memorial and Remonstrance in 1785, which persuaded the Virginia legislature to pass Jeffersons bill. The rights of conscience are unalienable, Madison wrote, because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds, cannot follow the dictates of other men.
2. Free speech makes representatives accountable to We the People.
In his Religious Freedom Bill, Jefferson emphasized that its crucial in a democracy for citizens to be able to criticize public officials because legislators and religious leaders, being themselves fallible and uninspired, will always try to impose their own opinions and modes of thinking on others. His prediction came to a head in the controversy of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, where the Federalist Congress made it a crime to criticize the Federalist President, John Adams, but not the Republican Vice President, Thomas Jefferson. And Madison, once again, echoed Jeffersons views in his Virginia Resolution, which said the Sedition Act ought to produce universal alarm, because it is levelled against that right of freely examining public characters and measures which is the only effectual guardian of every other right.
3. Free speech is necessary for the discovery and spread of political truth.
Jefferson concludes his Religious Freedom Bill with words expressing his unshakeable faith in the power of reasoned deliberation to distinguish truth from error, words that are inscribed in marble on the Jefferson Memorial in Washington: truth is great and will prevail if left to herself; she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate.
4. Free speech allows the public discussion necessary for democratic self-government.
Jefferson believed that in a democracy, all citizens have an equal right and responsibility to exercise their rights of conscience. As Jefferson put it in his Virginia Bill, proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right.
On the Supreme Court, in the greatest free speech opinion of the twentieth century, Justice Louis Brandeis distilled Jeffersons four reasons for protecting free speech into a few inspiring paragraphs. In the case, Whitney v. California, we see the first Jewish Justice insisting on the right of Anita Whitney, a white woman, to make a speech defending anti-lynching laws, which were designed to protect the life and liberty of African Americans. Whitney made her speech at a Communist Party meeting, and she was convicted under a California law that made it a crime to associate with organizations that advocated doctrines that might lead to people to break the law. In 1926, Brandeis had read Jeffersons original draft of the Virginia Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom. In his Whitney opinion in 1927, Brandeis adopted and refined Jeffersons standard for ensuring that government could only punish overt acts of lawbreaking, not the expression of dangerous opinions.
As Brandeis put it in Whitney, Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears. To justify suppression of free speech there must be reasonable ground to fear that serious evil will result if free speech is practiced. [And] There must be reasonable ground to believe that the danger apprehended is imminent.
Brandeiss inspiring test government can ban speech only if its intended to and likely to cause imminent and serious injury was based on his Jeffersonian faith in the power of what he called free and fearless reasoning to expose falsehood through public discussion. As Brandeis put it, If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence. Only an emergency can justify repression. Brandeiss test was finally adopted by the Supreme Court in 1969. As a result, the United States Supreme Court now protects free speech more vigorously than any other judiciary in the world.
Brandeis went on to summarize Jeffersons four reasons for why government cannot make laws designed to restrict what Jefferson called the illimitable freedom of the human mind. And in the process he achieved a kind of constitutional poetry. I will now read Brandeiss central passage listen closely for each of Jeffersons four reasons: freedom of conscience, democratic accountability, discovery of truth, and democratic self-government.
Those who won our independence believed that the final end of the state was to make men free to develop their faculties and that in its government the deliberative forces should prevail over the arbitrary. They valued liberty both as an end and as a means. They believed liberty to be the secret of happiness and courage to be the secret of liberty. [Thats a quotation from Pericles funeral oration]. They 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 the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people; that public discussion is a political duty; and that this should be a fundamental principle of the American government.
But as this paragraph shows, all four of Jefferson and Brandeiss reasons for protecting free speech are based on an Enlightenment faith in reason itself. The First Amendment is based on a faith that people will take the time to develop their faculties of reason, through education and public discussion; that public deliberation will check arbitrary and partisan demagogues rather than enable them; that more speech will lead to the spread of more truth rather than more falsehood; and that people will, in fact, take time for discussion and deliberation, rather than make impulsive decisions.
This founding faith in reason is being questioned in our polarized age of social media. Twitter, Facebook, and other platforms are based on a business model thats now being called enrage to engage. They have accelerated public discourse to warp speed, creating virtual versions of the mob. Inflammatory posts based on passion travel farther and faster than arguments based on reason. Rather than encouraging deliberation, mass media undermine it by creating bubbles and echo chambers in which citizens see only those opinions they already embrace. For these reasons, some are calling for Americas free speech tradition to be reconsidered or abandoned.
Here at the National Constitution Center, by contrast, we are proud to reaffirm the faith in reasoned deliberation by consecrating the 45 words that will shine forever in this hallowed space. As a vital platform for non partisan education and debate, we bring together Americans of different perspectives to cultivate their faculties of reason. Only by listening to the best arguments on all sides of the constitutional questions at the center of American life can all of us exercise our right and duty to make up our own minds. Like Jefferson and Brandeis and Frederick Douglass and Ruth Bader Ginsburg and all of the great free speech heroes of America history, we are dedicated to preserving, protecting, and defending what Jefferson called the illimitable freedom of the human mind. May the shining words of the First Amendment Tablet inspire future generations with this self-evident truth: reason will always combat error as long as individuals are free to follow the dictates of conscience wherever it boldly leads. On behalf of all of us at the National Constitution Center, thanks again to Jan Neuharth and Judge Luttig for making this memorable ceremony possible, and thanks to all of you for joining us.
Download Speech Transcript
Read more here:
From Jefferson to Brandeis: The First Amendment, the Declaration, and the Constitution - National Constitution Center
- Trump and his allies are suddenly downplaying the First Amendment - CNN - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Jimmy Kimmel, the FCC, and Why Broadcasters Still Have Junior Varsity First Amendment Rights - Cato Institute - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Does the First Amendment apply in Jimmy Kimmel's suspension? - CBS News - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- What to Know About Hate Speech and the First Amendment - The New York Times - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Why Jimmy Kimmels First Amendment rights werent violated but ABCs would be protected if it stood up to the FCC and Trump - The Conversation - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- First Amendment discussion takes Tim Heaphy back to the days writing 2017 report - Cville Right Now - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- First Amendment advocates increasingly worried after ABC pulled Jimmy Kimmel's show - USA Today - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- While you may not agree with the content, canceling Jimmy Kimmel Live! out of fear of retaliation from a President who quite literally cant take a... - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Is hate speech protected by the First Amendment? What to know after Charlie Kirk's killing - IndyStar - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- What does Jimmy Kimmels suspension really say about the First Amendment? | ChicagoNOW - FOX 32 Chicago - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Press Freedom and the First Amendment - Concord Monitor - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Philanthropies and Nonprofits Speak Out Against Attacks on First Amendment - Inside Philanthropy - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Daily Herald opinion: The first amendment is under assault. We should all be defending it - Daily Herald - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- The First Amendment and judicial proceedings: Mary McCord in conversation - The Contrarian - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- SPJ announces 2025 winners of Distinguished Teaching in Journalism, Galvan Outstanding Graduate in Journalism, Lewis First Amendment Awards - Society... - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- R.I.P. the First Amendment, Killed by Cowardice and Greed - The Daily Beast - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Free speech in the workplace? A First Amendment attorney weighs in - WKYC - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Do you think the Trump administration is a threat to First Amendment free speech protections with its recent efforts to stifle dissent? - Wyoming... - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- First Amendment advocates increasingly worried after ABC pulls Jimmy Kimmel. Here's why - Yahoo - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Mass. teachers are being placed on leave for posts on Charlie Kirks death. What are their First Amendment rights? - The Boston Globe - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- The First Amendment is for we, not just thee - Baptist News Global - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Charlie Kirk And The Chill Effect Ices The First Amendment - Colorado Times Recorder - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Opinion | Censoring Jimmy Kimmel Is Not The Biggest Threat To The First Amendment - Common Dreams - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- LAUSD has a social media policy for parents. ACLU says it violates the First Amendment - LAist - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- What does the First Amendment mean and how does it work? - CBS News - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Pam Bondi's hate speech comments exposed a stunning ignorance of the First Amendment - MSNBC News - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Jon Stewart Responds to Jimmy Kimmel Live! Being Pulled: 'We Have a Little Thing Called the First Amendment' - People.com - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Private unions and the limits of First Amendment claims - Daily Journal - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- The first amendment is not what it used to be: Nicolle Wallace reacts to Jimmy Kimmels suspension - MSNBC News - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- ISU legal scholar on the First Amendment: 'Its very misunderstood' - WGLT - September 19th, 2025 [September 19th, 2025]
- Cruz says First Amendment absolutely protects hate speech in wake of Charlie Kirk killing - Politico - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- Does the First Amendment protect you at work? Charlie Kirk critics are learning the answer - The Hill - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- Pam Bondi Is Clueless About the First Amendment - New York Magazine - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- The rights free speech defenders declare war on First Amendment over Charlie Kirk murder reactions - The Independent - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- Federal judge overturns part of Floridas book ban law, drawing on nearly 100 years of precedent protecting First Amendment access to ideas - The... - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- How online reactions to Charlie Kirk's killing test limits of First Amendment - USA Today - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- From TikTok to the First Amendment: Exploring journalism and democracy in a USC Annenberg course open to all majors - USC Annenberg - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- Charlie Kirk comments got them fired: Do they have First Amendment protection? - NewsNation - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- Law professor on First Amendment and social media in the wake of Charlie Kirk assassination - WCTV - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- Hiding Behind Kirk, Team Trump Launches 'Biggest Assault on the First Amendment' in Modern US History - Common Dreams - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- Donald Trump vs the First Amendment - The Spectator World - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- New Yorks Ban on Addictive Social Media Feeds for Kids Takes Shape With Proposed Rules - First Amendment Watch - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- Republicans are honoring Charlie Kirks memory by declaring war on the First Amendment - The Verge - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- Charlie Kirk comments got them fired: Do they have First Amendment protection? - MSN - September 17th, 2025 [September 17th, 2025]
- South Bend responds to teacher comments about Charlie Kirk's death, cites First Amendment - South Bend Tribune - September 15th, 2025 [September 15th, 2025]
- What are the limits of free speech? Online controversies spark First Amendment debate - WKRC - September 13th, 2025 [September 13th, 2025]
- Are teachers' social media posts on Charlie Kirk protected by the First Amendment? - CBS News - September 13th, 2025 [September 13th, 2025]
- Federal Court Blocks Trump Administrations Freeze of Grants to Harvard University: Implications for First Amendment and Title VI Enforcement -... - September 13th, 2025 [September 13th, 2025]
- Dunleavy: A tribute to Charlie Kirk and the First Amendment - Juneau Empire - September 13th, 2025 [September 13th, 2025]
- This Just In: The Very First Amendment - Chapelboro.com - September 13th, 2025 [September 13th, 2025]
- FWC is limiting social media comments, raising First Amendment concerns - Creative Loafing Tampa - September 13th, 2025 [September 13th, 2025]
- On the First Amendment and the Fourth Estate - Boca Beacon - September 13th, 2025 [September 13th, 2025]
- WATCH: The first amendment vs. fascism - The.Ink | Anand Giridharadas - September 11th, 2025 [September 11th, 2025]
- Opinion | Vivek Ramaswamy: An Ohio County vs. the First Amendment - The Wall Street Journal - September 11th, 2025 [September 11th, 2025]
- Former Backpage CEO Gets Three Years of Probation After Testifying at Trial About Sites Sex Ads - First Amendment Watch - September 11th, 2025 [September 11th, 2025]
- Charlie Kirk Died Protecting the First Amendment Says Grant County GOP Chair - Source ONE News - September 11th, 2025 [September 11th, 2025]
- This school year, attacks on the First Amendment extend to our schoolhouse doors | Opinion - Bergen Record - September 9th, 2025 [September 9th, 2025]
- A Decades-Long Peace Vigil Outside the White House Is Dismantled After Trumps Order - First Amendment Watch - September 9th, 2025 [September 9th, 2025]
- Woman sues Madison County attorney, former Madison city clerk over alleged violation of First Amendment rights - norfolkneradio.com - September 9th, 2025 [September 9th, 2025]
- Talkative Defendant Is Told He Misunderstands First Amendment By Harvey Weinstein Judge - Inner City Press - September 9th, 2025 [September 9th, 2025]
- 'South Park' keeps tying Trump to Satan. What to know about satire and the First Amendment - USA Today - September 6th, 2025 [September 6th, 2025]
- Man told to take down Trump flag says it's a First Amendment issue. Mayor says it has to be on a flag pole - News 12 - Westchester - September 6th, 2025 [September 6th, 2025]
- First Amendment Rights and Protesting in Tennessee - Nashville Banner - September 6th, 2025 [September 6th, 2025]
- Northwestern University President Says He Will Resign Following Tenure Marked by White House Tension - First Amendment Watch - September 6th, 2025 [September 6th, 2025]
- Surprise resident's First Amendment fight against city far from over one year later - yourvalley.net - September 6th, 2025 [September 6th, 2025]
- Letter: Trump crushes the First Amendment - InForum - September 5th, 2025 [September 5th, 2025]
- From Kozminski to Cherwitz: The TVPA's Transformation from Anti-Trafficking Tool to First Amendment Weapon - The National Law Review - September 5th, 2025 [September 5th, 2025]
- Graham Linehans arrest shows we need a UK First Amendment - Spiked - September 5th, 2025 [September 5th, 2025]
- First Amendment battles loom over another religious law in Texas - yahoo.com - September 5th, 2025 [September 5th, 2025]
- Trump Administration Agrees To Restore Health Websites and Data - First Amendment Watch - September 5th, 2025 [September 5th, 2025]
- MFIA Clinic Urges FTC to Withdraw Proposed Consent Order on First Amendment Grounds - Yale Law School - September 5th, 2025 [September 5th, 2025]
- Judge Reverses Trump Administrations Cuts of Billions of Dollars to Harvard University - First Amendment Watch - September 5th, 2025 [September 5th, 2025]
- Harvard Wins Legal Battle over Research Funding, Citing First Amendment Rights - Davis Vanguard - September 5th, 2025 [September 5th, 2025]
- We have the First Amendment and we have to protect it: GOP lawmaker - Fox Business - September 5th, 2025 [September 5th, 2025]
- Jay Bhattacharya: the First Amendment is unenforceable - UnHerd - September 5th, 2025 [September 5th, 2025]
- Judge rules Trump administration violated First Amendment in Harvard funding dispute - Washington Times - September 5th, 2025 [September 5th, 2025]
- LAWSUIT: Texas bans the First Amendment at public universities after dark - FIRE | Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression - September 3rd, 2025 [September 3rd, 2025]
- Organization Defends UTCs First Amendment Rights As Greek Life Paused In Hazing Probe - Black Enterprise - September 1st, 2025 [September 1st, 2025]
- Thank Goodness For The First Amendment: SALT In Review - Law360 - August 29th, 2025 [August 29th, 2025]
- Meet the First Amendment reporters protecting your freedoms | Opinion - The Tennessean - August 29th, 2025 [August 29th, 2025]