We the People: Speech as a Check (Episode 1)

“The extraordinary protections afforded by the 1st Amendment carry with them something in the nature of a fiduciary duty to exercise the protected rights responsibly, a duty widely acknowledged but not always observed…” Chief Justice Warren Burger made this statement in reference to newspaper and broadcasting enterprises’ duty to protect the right of fair trial by unbiased jurors; however, this statement also captures the essence of the fiduciary duty The People have to serve as a check against the government. History tells us that the drafters debated whether the people were intelligent enough to know how they should be governed and thus worthy to be entrusted as an unnamed check against the government. Over time, consistently keeping our voices silent when we feel wrongs have been committed and not taking immediate action to rectify those wrongs supports the Hamiltonian belief that America should be under the control and guidance of a few able men with the general population deferring to their wisdom.

Citizens have effective tools at their disposal to incite change: the freedom to assemble and the freedom of press together create a powerful voice protected by the freedom of speech. Effective advocacy of contentious issues requires the assembly of like-minded advocates pressing for change or restitution. Such assemblage personifies liberty and should be exercised without hesitation. Supplementary to this advocacy is the role of the press in facilitating “informed public opinion, the most potent of all restraints upon misgovernment.” Now that technology has increased the prevalence of citizen journalism, The People have an even greater duty to keep each other informed and to convey the thoughts of a few to the masses. Steady dialogue on our thoughts and principles will strengthen society and repair the divisions hindering our advancement as a nation. The collaboration of assembled citizen advocates, real and virtual (internet), and the free press is the lifeblood of “speech…the essence of self government.” Appropriately, the people should actively exercise their freedom to engage in the “debate on public issues…” in an “uninhibited, robust and wide open” manner.

In addition to the legal maneuvering that took place in Bush v. Gore, the lesser acknowledged but equally dreadful aspect of that historic moment was that The People didn’t rise up and vehemently contest the outcome. Immediately after the Supreme Court “stole the election” those citizens who felt robbed should have taken to the streets of Washington and, pardon my French, raised Holy Hell. There should have been advocates spewing rhetoric fiery enough to elicit “unity and action in a common cause.” Citizens should have drafted pamphlets with the revolutionary tone of Thomas Paine’s Common Sense coercing the government to take corrective action. The revolutionary reaction shouldn’t have been akin to the recent violence in Kenya but it should have resulted in more than the release of Fahrenheit 9/11.

Like-minded citizens joining in a collective effort towards a common end sits at the root of the American political process. Citizens should not stand by and watch representatives abuse our trust without exercising our right to protest. While I trust that the majority of representatives won’t indulge in mischief, if and when improper behavior does take place, it is up to the people to not only vote those people out of office but to publicly denounce those actions. The People should actively protest in the streets, on the Capitol steps and in the press.