This was an interesting article to me. It seemed that the lawyers whose views were being presented were saying that something was amiss in the USA only because liberals were no longer winning many First Amendment Supreme Court cases, but now conservatives were. There was little examination of the actual arguments for cases and whether the plaintiffs were right to invoke the First Amendment in their favor. The author stressed that progressive concerns were no longer being helped by the First Amendment. The author also stressed that hate speech was being helped by the First Amendment, emphasizing ‘hate’ which is subjective barring the incitement of violence, rather than the fact that it is simply speech. The takeaway from the article was that this was an issue if conservatives were winning the First Amendment cases, not whether or not those conservatives’ rights were being rightfully protected under the First Amendment, as citizens of the USA, protected by the constitution.
This ties into a general trend I see of liberals in high positions, i.e. lawyers and professors at prominent academic institutions, and journals such as the New York Times, no longer caring about the citizen as an individual, but caring about groups being protected, and specifically being protected in the way they think is good under the progressive agenda. There is also a trend of hijacking what should be neutral protections available to all individuals, such as the First Amendment, for the use of only specific groups that the progressive agenda claims to want to help.
The use of a bar chart as data to support the author’s point, also seemed like a way to add weight to an empty argument.
Video Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJjJOozzbxw