austin felts 11/9/2009
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/14/2019 Austin Felts 11/9/2009
1/2
Austin Felts
11/9/2009
Amendment2
During the early colonial times of the United States, there typically wasnt a problem
with criticizing monarchs or writing seditious letters to other townsfolk. Perhaps this is mainly
due to the fact that it was English common law that seditious libel would lead to lifeimprisonment. Was this law successful in preventing a full-blown revolution? I think what we
do on July 4th can answer that question on its own. Freedom of speech as we know it dates
back to the 1780s, shortly after the American Revolution and the Constitution was formed. It
was formed along with a bundle of other ideas that the founders thought were necessary as
human rights, known as the Bill of Rights.
With certain freedoms being so abundant in the United States, it seems like human nature
leads us on quests to find clever ways to abuse them. The first major problem with freedom of
speech came in 1798 whenever Thomas Jeffersons supporters began to use negative portrayals
towards John Adams in newsletters and newspapers. Because of the fact that televisions,
cameras, and large scale radio broadcasts were not being used in this period of time, Adams
presidential candidacy suffered severe effects from this criticism. To halt this type of free speech
abuse, the government approved the first sedition act on July 14, 1798. Described by the U.S.
government, it was "an act for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States."
(wikipedia) In Section I of the sedition act, it states that it punishes combinations against
United States government with and offence of unlawfully combining or conspiring together to
oppose any measure of the government of the United States... (constitution.org). Section II
criminalizes seditious writings that attempt to defame the government. Even though none of
these crimes reached any greater penalty than a high misdemeanor, it seems like the sedition
act effectively silenced most of the seditious statements and writings that were taking place.
However, this act wasnt necessarily focused merely on United States citizens. It was also
created in an attempt to hinder the spread of those who were still loyal to their former countries,
such as Britain and France.
Although this act was quickly forced to a halt in 1802 by Thomas Jefferson, another act is
currently being enforced. The Alien Enemies Act is the third of the four acts that form the Alien
and Sedition Act. The article states that it shall be enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled andIn case of war, or
actual threatened invasion, the President shall make a proclamationthat whenever there shall
be a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, the President
of the United States shall make public proclamation of the eventthat subjects of the hostilenation or government, being males of the age of fourteen years and upwardsshall be liable to
be apprehended, restrained, secured and removed, as alien enemies. (Chap. LXVI.An Act
respecting Alien Enemies.) This gives the president the right to put anyone in a detainment
center that he believes poses a threat to the United States. Unfortunately, the chances of the
president actually using this power in slim to none. In fact, the majority of the cases against
seditious crimes took place before the 20th century and mainly involved party-controlled
-
8/14/2019 Austin Felts 11/9/2009
2/2
Austin Felts
11/9/2009
newspaper companies. More recently, national security levels have obviously been at an all time
peak because of the events of September 11. Former speaker of the house Newt Gingrich
believes that the first amendment compromises our American security by giving terrorists space
to negotiate with each other. He has a great point. Because of our ability to use free speech in
just about every way we desire, terrorists can create websites with the solitary goal of recruiting
other young terrorists to destroy more American lives. Gingrich describes that we [should]adopt rules of engagement that use every technology we can find to break up their capacity to
use the internet, to break up their capacity to use free speech, and to go after people who want to
kill us to stop them from recruiting people before they get to reach out and convince young
people to destroy their lives while destroying us. (Head Pg 1) However this is where a major
problem comes in. Does this mean that we have to make amendments the very amendment that
makes our live so American? The first amendment needs to be vigorously discussed and debated
so that we may come to a mature solution to this problem. I understand the importance of
freedom of speech, but when someones religion is kill nonbelievers, I think that certain
freedoms should be taken away. If a child cant play with sharp objects without hurting
something, dont give him sharp objects
Work Cited
PUBLIC DOMAIN Alien and Sedition Acts November 3, 2009
PUBLIC DOMAIN Summary of Constitutional Rights, Powers and Duties October 16, 1999http://constitution.org/powright.htm
TOM HEAD Newt Gingrich and Free Speech: A New Sedition Act? November 27, 2006
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/freespeech/i/newseditionact.htm
PUBLIC DOMAIN United States Statutes at Large/Volume 1/5th Congress/2nd
Session/Chapter 66 October 9, 2009
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Large/Volume_1/5th_Congress/2nd_Se
ssion/Chapter_66
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Actshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Actshttp://constitution.org/powright.htmhttp://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Large/Volume_1/5th_Congress/2nd_Session/Chapter_66http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Large/Volume_1/5th_Congress/2nd_Session/Chapter_66http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Actshttp://constitution.org/powright.htmhttp://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Large/Volume_1/5th_Congress/2nd_Session/Chapter_66http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Large/Volume_1/5th_Congress/2nd_Session/Chapter_66