EDITORIAL: Free speech for me, not for thee

Trampling the First Amendment has become a bipartisan exercise. Apparently, the underlying philosophy of many on opposite sides of the political spectrum today is that they’re all for free speech — unless they disagree with it.

“Again and again, political actors preach the importance of free speech, only to reach for the censor’s muzzle when it helps their side,” Greg Lukianoff of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression wrote in a recent New York Times op-ed. “If, like me, you defend free speech as a principle rather than invoke it opportunistically, you get distressingly accustomed to seeing the same people take opposite positions on an issue, sometimes within the space of just a few months.”

This is an accurate, if dismal, assessment of our current political climate.

On Tuesday, Jimmy Kimmel returned to the airwaves after his show was put on hiatus following controversial comments he made about the Charlie Kirk assassination. Many conservatives applauded the move, while those on the left insisted that Mr. Kimmel’s suspension was an affront to free expression.

TV networks and station owners have the right to make decisions about what they air, of course. But the move came after Brandon Carr, head of the Federal Communications Commission, implied that federal regulators would punish ABC and its parent company Disney if they didn’t “take action” against Mr. Kimmel.

Why the FCC, a Depression-era creation, still has any authority over network TV content in this age of information overload is an issue for another day. But Mr. Carr’s threats do indeed represent an attack on the First Amendment. Those cheering him on from the right might pause to consider how such an agenda could be used against them under a less friendly administration.

That is no theoretical scenario. In a letter to a U.S. House committee last week, Google attorneys admitted that the Biden administration “created a political atmosphere that sought to influence the actions” of the company when it came to removing and censoring so-called “misinformation” about COVID. Google said it will now restore certain accounts that were suspended as a result of the federal coercion.

But in this case, progressives were largely silent regarding the First Amendment ramifications of government officials strong-arming tech companies to suppress the thoughts of those who dared challenge establishment orthodoxy regarding the pandemic, some of which was later determined to be dubious, at best. Meanwhile, Republicans were up in arms about federal bureaucrats attempting to restrict free discourse.

The First Amendment doesn’t cover private actions by private companies. But in both these cases, government actors exerted pressure to quash speech. This endangers First Amendment freedoms no matter whether the offender has a “D” or an “R” next to his or her name.

There have been a handful of voices who recognize the hypocrisy of partisans on both sides. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, condemned Mr. Carr’s comments, as did Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. “Brendan Carr has got no business weighing in on this,” the latter said last week. In addition, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., previously objected to the Biden White House pressuring social media companies and wrote last week in the Wall Street Journal that “free speech is fundamental to who we are as Americans, and defending it must transcend partisanship.”

Unfortunately, however, too many politicians today raise their voices out of self-interest rather than as a philosophical and principled defense of one of this nation’s most cherished and vital protections. And that’s a prescription for the erosion of our freedoms.