“With the addition of Walz, Democrats now have arguably the most anti-free speech ticket of a major party in more than two centuries,” says Jonathan Turley.
A Harris-Walz administration would be a “nightmare for free speech,” according to George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley.
In an op-ed for The Hill, Turley explained how the Biden administration’s “unrelenting attack on the freedom of speech” would only accelerate in a Harris administration.
“President Biden made censorship a central part of his legacy, even accusing social media companies of “killing people” for failing to increase levels of censorship,” Turley wrote Saturday.
“Democrats in Congress pushed that agenda by demanding censorship on subjects ranging from climate change to gender identity — even to banking policy — in the name of combatting ‘disinformation.’”
Harris has long supported anti-free speech policies. The addition of Walz completes a perfect nightmare for free speech advocates. Walz has shown not only a shocking disregard for free speech but a shocking lack of understanding of the First Amendment. https://t.co/Cll8BaoP3U
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) August 10, 2024
Turley noted that Kamala Harris has been supportive of these unconstitutional policies from the beginning, and her selection of Gov. Tim Walz (D-Minn.) as her running mate all but guarantees that free speech is in danger should they win the 2024 election.
“As vice president, Harris has long supported these anti-free speech policies. The addition of Walz completes a perfect nightmare for free speech advocates,” he wrote. “Walz has shown not only a shocking disregard for free speech values but an equally shocking lack of understanding of the First Amendment.”
“Walz went on MSNBC to support censoring disinformation and declared, ‘There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy.’”
“Ironically, this false claim, repeated by many Democrats, constitutes one of the most dangerous forms of disinformation,” Turley continued. “It is being used to convince a free people to give up some of their freedom with a ‘nothing to see here’ pitch.”
“With the addition of Walz, Democrats now have arguably the most anti-free speech ticket of a major party in more than two centuries. Both candidates are committed to using disinformation, misinformation and malinformation as justifications for speech controls. The third category has been emphasized by the Biden-Harris administration, which explained that it is information ‘based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate,’” Turley added.
Turley went on to set the record straight about the First Amendment’s protections of speech, which include what Democrats call “hate speech.”
The Supreme Court has consistently rejected the claim of Gov. Walz. For example, in the 2016 Matal v. Tam decision, the court stressed that this precise position “strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express ‘the thought that we hate.’”
Even though the Biden-Harris administration has “notably toned down its anti-free speech efforts as the election approaches,” Turley warned that its anti-free speech policies will return “with a vengeance” if Harris and Walz win the election.
“That could be radically enhanced if the Democrats take both houses of Congress and once again block investigations into their censorship programs,” Turley concluded.
