Violating the Constitution with Impunity

[keyser-soze at hushmail.com]

A recent speech by former FCC Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth is rather refreshing. A key quote.

"Today, when the federal government violates the constitution including the First Amendment, we mostly find silence from the media."

http://www.aei.org/sp/sp111601b.htm

There is little doubt that much that we have taken for granted in the United States has changed in the past two months.  Our feeling of security, our confidence in the safety of public facilities, and our general sense of well-being have all been shaken. 

The poignant question is raised about whether the First Amendment—particularly the speech provision--has changed, or perhaps whether the government’s interpretation of it has changed.  I have some good news.  The words of the First Amendment are the same today as they were two months ago, or two years ago, or two decades ago, or two centuries ago. 

But I also have some bad news.  The First Amendment has been violated many times in the past two centuries.  As Floyd Abrams noted earlier this morning, many of our greatest national leaders have taken great liberties in curtailing the First Amendment, particularly in times of crisis.  And it is not just our great leaders, and it is not only in times of crisis, that the First Amendment has been violated.  The constitution itself, and the First Amendment in particular, are violated frequently. 

Moreover, those who violate the constitution are rarely held accountable.  Public servants largely have immunity for liability in their performance of their public functions.  But, when it comes to the constitution, that immunity often turns into impunity, a veritable license to violate at will.  Aside from occasional public disapprobation, there is no penalty for violating the Constitution generally or the First Amendment in particular.