Enjoying Framechange? Forward to a friend to help spread the word!
New to Framechange? Sign up for free to see multiple sides in your inbox.
Learn more about our mission to reduce polarization and how we represent different viewpoints here.
Quick announcement
I hope you’re having a great start to fall. After today’s edition, we’ll be taking a short break and will be back in a few weeks.
In the meantime, we’d love to hear what topics you’d like us to cover next, as well as your thoughts on this week’s look at the free speech environment in the US. Thanks for reading.
– Dylan
Snippets
A gunman drove into a Latter-day Saints church in Grand Blanc, Michigan and opened fire during a service, killing at least 4 people and injuring 8 others before being fatally shot by police. The FBI is investigating the incident as “targeted violence,” with the motive still unknown.
A shooter opened fire at a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) field office in Dallas, killing one detainee at the facility and critically wounding two others before dying of a self-inflicted gunshot wound. The FBI said that rounds found near the suspected shooter had messages that were “anti-ICE in nature.”
Former FBI Director James Comey was indicted by a federal grand jury in Virginia on counts of making a false statement and obstructing a congressional proceeding. The case centers around statements made during Comey’s 2020 Senate testimony on the FBI’s handling of election interference efforts during the 2016 presidential election.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams officially ended his re-election campaign amid challenges with fundraising, approval ratings, and scrutiny over a dismissed federal corruption case.
A federal judge ruled that President Trump violated the law when he dismissed 17 agency inspectors general without giving Congress required notice. The judge declined to reinstate the officials, however, due to a lack of irreparable harm.
What’s happening
In the weeks since Charlie Kirk’s murder, several members of the Trump administration have publicly called for or threatened penalties against people whose remarks about Kirk they said crossed the line.
On Sep 15, Vice President JD Vance, guest-hosting Kirk’s podcast, urged listeners: “When you see someone celebrating Charlie’s murder, call them out, and hell, call their employer.”
After Jimmy Kimmel suggested on his late-night show that Kirk’s killer was part of the MAGA movement, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr condemned the comments as “truly sick,” warning: “We can do this the easy way or the hard way… Companies can act on Kimmel, or the FCC will have more work ahead.” Soon after, ABC – owned by Disney – suspended Kimmel’s show. He was off the air for six episodes before being reinstated by ABC on Sep 23.
Kimmel is one of at least 100 people – including educators, healthcare workers, airline workers, and a Secret Service agent – who have faced professional consequences for remarks about Kirk. In several cases, lawmakers themselves pushed for firings. On Sep 16, Attorney General Pam Bondi said the Justice Department would be “targeting anyone with hate speech,” adding: “There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech.” After facing criticism for her initial remarks, she clarified that it was “hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence” that is not protected by the First Amendment.
These recent events have sharpened the debate over definitions of free speech and whether the Trump administration is eroding free speech protections. Today, we bring you viewpoints from multiple sides. Let us know what you think.
Notable viewpoints
More opposed to the idea that free speech is under attack:
Americans are still practicing free speech without consequence.
President Trump may have authoritarian instincts, but the First Amendment has not been revoked. Leading voices in the US are almost uniformly outspoken against the Trump administration and they speak without being regulated, censored, canceled or criminalized for their speech. In the case of Jimmy Kimmel, Disney was not censored by the FCC – rather, Disney folded and suspended Kimmel without challenging the threat of regulatory sanctions.
Penalizing those celebrating the assassination isn’t “cancel culture,” it’s morality winning out over violent discourse.
Firing, suspending, and shaming people for celebrating the assassination of an innocent man does not equate to “cancel culture.” True cancel culture had aimed to disrupt established norms of speech and debate, and in the process harmed people who expressed views that were actually held by the majority of the country. Cheering for the murder of a political opponent, however, has long been unacceptable and it’s healthy for our political environment to penalize those who do so.
Calling for penalties on those celebrating or mischaracterizing an assassination is not “cancel culture,” which is wrong no matter which side the target is on. The public is rightly recoiling from a repulsive line of commentary about a murdered man, a welcome sign that basic decency is making a comeback.
“Protecting free speech means tolerating expression of most of the hateful thoughts generated… But when these thoughts extend to lauding assassinations and celebrating death, there should be consequences. Prosecution shouldn’t be one of those consequences. But discipline by an employer should be. That discipline can include discharge. In some cases, it certainly should.” (Paul Mirengoff, Ringside at the Reckoning.)
Penalizing mischaracterizations of political violence is no worse than what the left has been doing to its opponents for years.
Progressives complaining about censorship are unable or unwilling to see the difference between political debate and rationalizing political violence. Moreover, it is disingenuous for the left to hide behind the First Amendment after they’ve spent years silencing speech and criminalizing political positions while simultaneously labeling their opponents as fascists and Nazis. The left is claiming to be a victim of a phenomenon it helped create, caring more about tribalism than actual free debate.
Jimmy Kimmel intentionally misled the public by labeling Kirk’s murderer as a MAGA supporter, which is unacceptable during a time of civil unrest. The FCC’s pressuring of Disney in response is no different than Former President Biden’s pressuring of tech companies into falling in line with so-called “misinformation” policies during his administration.
More supportive of the idea that free speech is under attack:
In censoring any speech, the government is removing freedoms from Americans.
Nothing justifies the government performing censorship through regulatory tactics such as those threatened by FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. Regulatory censorship creates a political cycle in which the government punishes its opponents – regardless of which party is in power – and leaves the entire country with less freedom and less free speech.
“Hate speech is not illegal. It is not even a legal category in the US. Yes, we have laws against incitement, defamation, and libel, but nothing so broad and amorphous as ‘hate speech.’ As Kirk himself once put it: ‘Hate speech does not exist legally in America. There’s ugly speech. There’s gross speech. There’s evil speech. And ALL of it is protected by the First Amendment. Keep America free.’” (The Editors, The Free Press.)
The government is silencing American citizens and corporations.
Trump is wrong to use Charlie Kirk’s death to suppress debate and demand full obedience from the country. Kirk said denigrating things about certain groups, but he had the right to speak his mind, as do his opponents. When people say something that violates common decency, they are still protected under the First Amendment.
Expressing outrage over statements one disagrees with is understandable, and the power to do so is foundational to living in a free society. What is occurring now, however, is state-backed repression. The US government is going after American corporations because it is unhappy with their politics. Whether these corporations fold to the government’s wishes out of fear of regulatory retribution or because they see financial interests in appeasing the government is irrelevant – it is still the result of state coercion.
It is terrifying that the federal government openly used its regulatory muscle to force Disney into suspending Kimmel. But it is just the latest in a series of threats to free speech that the Trump administration has pushed over the past several months which – given Trump’s expressed hatred towards his opponents – could get much worse. Trump clearly wants to use the government as a weapon to silence his enemies.
The government is violating US statute.
The government’s censorship campaign is a wrongful abuse of its power and a violation of the First Amendment. As Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) established, speech considered hateful is still protected by the First Amendment as long as it does not cause imminent violence. Moreover, NRA v. Vullo (2023) prohibits government officials from calling for people to lose their jobs or face other punishment for expressing their political views.
Be heard
We want to hear from you! Comment below with your perspective on the free speech environment in the US and we may feature it in our socials or future editions. Below are topic ideas to consider.
Do you think the Trump administration is attacking free speech in the aftermath of the Charlie Kirk assassination? Why or why not?
What are some arguments or supporting points you appreciate about a viewpoint you disagree with?
Give us your feedback! Please let us know how we can improve.
Music on the bottom
New song from Colter Wall, who seems to only be getting better. This is “1800 Miles.”
– Dylan
Listen on Spotify, Apple Music, or Amazon Music.