First Amendment: Then and Now by Roger Carlton

Roger Carlton lived in Robbinsville, NC, until he moved north. He is a man I admire and I believe he should have a voice here.   This article is appropriate for what is happening now.

  October 1, 2025 Column

First Amendment: Then and Now

Last week, Beth and I, our daughter, and our son-in-law attended a lecture by Lech Walesa. Those of us with some gray hair will remember that he was the Polish labor leader who led the Solidarity Movement that brought democracy to a former Soviet Union vassal state. He began with a small labor union at the Gdansk Shipyard. The union was outlawed, and he was arrested a number of times. When he was released, he continued his efforts to move Poland from a Socialist-Leninist economy to a free market economy. In 1989, an election was held, and Poland’s democratic government was launched. For his courageous achievements, Lech Walesa was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

There were a number of statements made by Mr. Walesa that are apropos of our First Amendment conflict today. 

First, he said, “We started with a few folks meeting to form an illegal union banned by our government, and soon we were 10 million strong.” 

The second statement was “Trying to stifle free speech always ends badly for the person doing the stifling.” 

What an honor to attend a speech by someone who changed the world. He and his movement began the end of the Soviet Union's oppressive regime.

So, what does this have to do with our First Amendment? A little history might prove interesting. The Framers wanted 12 amendments, which were to become known as the Bill of Rights. This brilliant idea meant that the core Constitution would not be changed. As time went on, amendments could be added or deleted as a single subject to be voted on by Congress and the states. This flexibility led to the adoption and repeal of Prohibition. It also led to the rejection of the Equal Rights Amendment. The state legislatures rejected the first two Amendments, leaving the Third Amendment as the First Amendment we find so controversial today. Don’t let anyone tell you it was the primary amendment because the Framers found it to be the most important.

The main protections in the First Amendment are religious liberty and freedom of speech, press, assembly, and petition. Religious liberty allowed people to practice their religion of choice and prohibited the government from establishing a national religion. Freedom of speech and the press prohibited censorship. Assembly and petition were focused on the right to meet and petition the government for redress of the issues of the day.

The Framers never dreamed of television, the internet, or social media. They were thinking about newspapers and pamphlets. There were no influencers with millions of followers. The Framers did not make their living by electronically reaching millions of people. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson traveled by horse and stagecoach. They were gentleman farmers when not forming a new democracy shaped on some pretty incredible ideas about the rights of most people. It took a while and a Civil War for slaves and women to truly become equal.

Censorship is the pernicious violation of the First Amendment rights of all of us. We are all self-censors by choosing which media to watch or read. Censorship comes in many forms. Editing an important investigatory document to remove a reference to someone in power is censorship in the form of redacting or failure to release the damaging evidence. Threatening to use government power to retaliate economically or legally is a form of censorship known as weaponization. Billions of dollars can ride on governmental approval or denial of a corporate application. Using unproven data or plain quackery to justify a government action is a form of censorship of science-based proven facts.

Unbridled censorship may lead to attempts to control thought. This can be seen in book burnings or in the removal of symbols, such as statues of people no longer in favor. There is an old Soviet joke wherein a citizen attends a protest and holds up a blank sign. When he asks the authorities why he was arrested, the response is “You might not have said it, but we know what you were thinking.”

To be fair, sometimes censorship is necessary. Remember the old saying, “You can’t yell fire in a theater if there is no fire.” How about “loose lips sink ships.” The real issue regarding the First Amendment limits on censorship is one we have yet to solve. People can say anything they want, and it goes “viral.” Millions of people can believe a statement with no validity and take action at the polls as a result. We might have our own Lech Walesa someday in the near future. We should hope that person believes in democracy and not autocracy.

Roger Carlton