Mediaboss Marketing

Is the First Amendment Under Attack?

Updated: 4:16 PM EDT May 5, 2017

The first amendment is being challenged on all sides freedom of religion is being tested in the Supreme Court, protests are keeping conservative pundits away from liberal campuses, and the White House is threatening a crackdown on the press. Over thirty tweets bashing the media have been sent out by President Donald Trump since inauguration. Besides condemning mainstream media as fake news, he also suggested the loosening of libel laws, something he called for on the campaign trail. But does the president have that authority or influence? First Amendment attorney Floyd Abrams says no the federal government has no power over libel laws which differ for each state. Abrams, best known for his defense of the New York Times in the Pentagon Papers case, has published his latest book, The Soul of the First Amendment. He joins Soledad OBrien to explain the intersection of free speech and the right to protest, the beginnings of the First Amendment, and the case a former president could have against the current one.

WEBVTT SOLEDAD: I'M SOLEDAD O'BRIEN.WELCOME TO "MATTER OF FACT."THE 45 WORDS THAT MAKE UP THEFIRST AMENDMENT ARE BEING TESTEDBY THE 140 CHARACTERS OFTWITTER.AT LEAST, THE PRESIDENT'STWITTER.PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ANTI-MEDIAPOSTS AND CHIEF OF STAFF REINCPRIEBUS' ADMISSION THAT THEWHITE HOUSE IS LOOKING INTOOPENING LIBEL LAWS COULD POSE ATHREAT TO FREEDOM OF THE PRESS,SUGGESTING RETALIATION FOR NEWSCOVERAGE CONSIDERED SLANTED.ONE LEGAL SCHOLAR SAYS THEPRESIDENT'S TRAIL OF TWEETSCOULD ACTUALLY PROTECT THE MEDIAPROVING HIS INTENT TO PUNISHJOURNALISTS BY USING THE LEGALSYSTEMFLOYD ABRAMS HAS WRITTEN A NBOOK.IT IS CALLED "THE SOUL OF THEFIRST AMENDMENT," TO RE-EDUCATEUS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OFPROTECTING SPEECH -- EVEN WHENWE FIND IT OFFENSIVE.ABRAMS ARGUED AT THE SUPREMECOURT ON BEHALF OF THE "NEW YORKTIMES" IN THE PENTAGON PAPERSCASE DURING THE NIXONADMINISTRATION AND HAS BEEN BACKIN COURT MANY TIMES SINCDEFENDING REPORTERS AND EDITORS.IT'S NICE TO SEE YOU, SIR.THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. YOU START THE BOOK WITH FASCINATING LOOK AT OUR NATION'SFOREFATHER1787, THE FIRST AMENDMENT, THEWENT BACK AND FORTH ON THEPHRASING. ORIGINALLY, THEY TALKED ABOUTTHE PEOPLE'S RIGHT ANDEVENTUALLY IT SHIFTED TO WHATCONGRESS COULDN'T DO. WHY DOES THE NUANCE MATTERFLOYD: IT MATTERS BECAUSE THELANGUAGE WE WOUND UP WITH --EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING -"CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAWCONGRESS LATER BECAME THEPRESIDENT ALSO AND THE STATESALSOBUT IT BECAME CLEAR A BAN, ABAR, A LIMITATION ON GOVERNMENT,WHICH IS THE STUFF OF LAW. THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS A LAWIT IS NOT A POEM, NOTASPIRATIONAL, NOT JUST A HOPEFOR THE FUTURE. IF YOU PHRASE IT THE OTHER WAY,IF YOU SAY PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BEDENIED THEIR RIGHTS, IT SOUNDAS IF WHAT YOU ARE SAYING --WOULDN'T THAT BE A GOOD IDEA?SO THEY DELIBERATELY MADE ITSTRONGER, BY MAKING IT NARROWER."CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAWABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECHOR OF THE PRESS."SOLEDAD: YET WE ARE CONSTANTGOING BACK AND FORTH ABOUTWHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING ISPROTECTED BY THE FIRSTAMENDMENT, FOR SOMETHING THATWAS SUPPOSED TO BE KIND OFSTRONG. DO YOU WORRY ABOUT PRESIDENTTRUMP, WHO HAS MADE HIS DISTASTEFOR BOTH JOURNALISTS AND THEFIRST AMENDMENT PRETTY CLEAR?FLOYD: WELL, YES I AM WORRIEDABOUT IT. I THINK SOME AREAS HE'S TALKEDABOUT HE REALLY CAN'T AND WON'TBE ABLE TO GET INTO, LIKE LIBELLAW. HE HAS SAID HE WANTS TO LOOSENTHE LIBEL LAW. BUT THERE IS NO FEDERAL LIBELLAW. THERE IS NO UNITED STATES LIBELLAW. WE HAVE 50 STATES, THEY HAVELIBEL LAWS. THERE IS NO ROLE FOR THEPRESIDENT OR THE CONGRESS ABOUTLIBEL LAW. AND OF COURSE, IT IS THE FIRSTAMENDMENT WHICH PROTECTS AGAINTHE STATE LIBEL LAWS SO AS TOMAKE IT REALLY HARD FOR APRESIDENT OR A PUBLIC OFFICIALOR A PUBLIC FIGURE TO WIN LIBEL CASE, PURPOSELY.LIBEL LAW ONLY APPLIES TO FALSSTATEMENTS OF FACT, NOT OPINION.NOW AN EXAMPLE, PRESIDENT OBAMACOULD SUE OUR PRESIDENT AND SAY,"YOU SAID I COMMITTED A CRIMINALACT BY WIRETAPPING YOU, AND ITIS NOT TRUE."THAT IS A LAWSUIT.SOLEDAD: THE FORMER PRESIDENTCOULD SUE THE CURRENT PRESIDENTFOR LIBEL? THAT WOULD BE -- FLOYD: THAT WOULD BE A GREATLAWSUIT.SOLEDAD: WOW, WOW. CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLARS WILL BEGOING CRAZY OVER THAT.LET'S TALK ABOUT PROTESTS ONCOLLEGE CAMPUSESMOST RECENT ONE IS ANN COULTERSUPPOSED TO SPEAK AT BERKELEY,IT SORT OF BECAME THIS BIG FREESPEECH DEBATE. EVEN THOUGH SHE NEVER SPOKE ANSHE WITHDREW, PROTESTERS MADE ITCLEAR, AND I AM ROUGHLYPARAPHRASING, THAT SHE ISCONSERVATIVE AND SHE DOESN'TDESERVE TO SPEAK HERE. PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE BERKELEY ISA PUBLIC UNIVERSITY.FLOYD: RIGHT. PUBLIC UNIVERSITY AND THEREFORESUBJECT TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT. WE TREAT PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES ASIF THEY WERE THE CONGRESS. AND SO, IF A PUBLIC UNIVERSITREATS HER DIFFERENTLY BECAUSESHE IS CONSERVATIVE OR BECAUSESHE IS OUTRAGEOUS, THERE COULDBE A LAWSUITSOLEDAD: SO IF SOMEBODY HAS ARIGHT TO FREE SPEECH, AND WEKNOW THAT PEOPLE WHO APROTESTING, THAT IS ALSO A FORMOF FREE SPEECH AND THEY HAVE THERIGHT TO PROTEST, WHERE IS THELINE? THEY BOTH HAVE A RIGHT.FLOYD: THEY DO BOTH HAVE ARIGHT. AND THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO HECKLE.WHAT THEY DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TOIS TO SHUT PEOPLE UP. THEY DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO BE SLOUD, OR SO CONTINUING, OR SOTHREATENING THAT THE SPEECHSIMPLY CAN'T GO ON.UNFORTUNATELY, THAT IS WHAT HASHAPPENED TOO OFTEN ON COLLEGECAMPUSES AROUND AMERICWE CAN'T JUST SAY THESE COLLEGESTUDENTS DON'T KNOW WHAT THEYARE DOING. WE HAVE TO TEACH THEM IN JUNIORHIGH SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL, ANDWE DO NEED CIVICS COURSE. WE DO NEED A LESSON ON AMERICANLIBERTY ON A CONTINUING BASISFROM THE TIME PEOPLE ARE KIDS.SOLEDAD: FLOYD ABRAMS, IT IS SO

See original here:
Is the First Amendment Under Attack? - WBAL Baltimore