From Jefferson to Brandeis: The First Amendment, the Declaration, and the Constitution – National Constitution Center
These remarks were delivered by Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center,at a May 2, 2022, celebration of the newly installed marble First Amendment tablet, donated to the National Constitution Center by the Freedom Forum. Its design and installation was made possible through the generosity of Judge J. Michael Luttig and Elizabeth Luttig.
Thank you, Judge [J. Michael] Luttig, for your gift to America in bringing the First Amendment Tablet to Philadelphia. Its fitting that the 45 words of the First Amendment will shine forever over Independence Hall, where the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were drafted. As we prepare to dedicate the Tablet, lets gaze together at Independence Hall and then turn our attention back to the words of the Tablet that are shining before us. Holding these two images in our minds is illuminating, because the First Amendment shows us the connection between the Declaration and the Constitution. It protects freedom of conscience, which the Founders considered first among the unalienable rights enshrined in the Preamble to the Declaration and first among the blessings of liberty enshrined in the Preamble to the Constitution.
How do we know that the rights of conscience, as the Founders called them, were first among the unalienable rights and the blessings of liberty recognized by the Declaration and the Constitution? We know that from two other sacred texts Id like to talk to you about now, as we dedicate the First Amendment Tablet together. Those text are Thomas Jeffersons Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom in Virginia, drafted in 1777, and Justice Brandeiss opinion in Whitney v. California, drafted in 1927.
Jefferson drafted his bill in Virginia months after he returned Philadelphia, where he had just completed the Declaration of Independence. He considered his Religious Freedom Bill among the three accomplishments of his life important enough to be inscribed on his tombstone, along with his having drafted the Declaration and founded the University of Virginia.
Under Virginias colonial religious code, all dissenters were required to support and attend the Established Anglican church. Presbyterians and Baptists could be arrested for practicing their faith or preaching the gospel. Quakers, Jews, and other dissenters could be denied the freedom to marry or to have custody of their children. Jefferson proposed not only to disestablish the Anglican Church and remove all criminal punishments for dissent, but also to prohibit all compelled support for religion of any kind. He concluded that because freedom of conscience is a fundamental right, government can regulate overt acts against peace and good order, but it lacks all power to intrude into the field of opinion.
Jeffersons Bill sets out four reasons why government can make no law that constrains our freedom of speech, conscience, or opinion. Those four reasons were summed up by Justice Brandeis in Whitney, and they have been further developed by the Supreme Court since then:
1. Freedom of conscience is an unalienable right because people can only think for themselves;
2. Free speech makes representatives accountable to We the People;
3. Free speech is necessary for the discovery of truth and the rejection of falsehood;
4. Free speech allows the public discussion necessary for democratic self government.
Lets review each of Jeffersons four reasons.
1. Freedom of conscience is an unalienable right
Well aware that the opinions and belief of men depend not on their own will, but follow involuntarily the evidence proposed to their minds, Jefferson wrote in the first sentence of his draft, God hath created the mind free,and manifested his supreme will that free it shall remain by making it altogether insusceptible of restraint. In other words, Jefferson argued, freedom of conscience is, by definition, an unalienable right one that cant be alienated or surrendered to government because our opinions are the involuntary result of the evidence contemplated by our reasoning minds. We cant give presidents, priests, teachers, or fellow citizens the power to think for us, even if we wanted to, because we are endowed as human beings with the capacity to reason and therefore cant help thinking for ourselves. We know that Madison, the drafter of the First Amendment, shared Jeffersons views because he echoed them in his Memorial and Remonstrance in 1785, which persuaded the Virginia legislature to pass Jeffersons bill. The rights of conscience are unalienable, Madison wrote, because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds, cannot follow the dictates of other men.
2. Free speech makes representatives accountable to We the People.
In his Religious Freedom Bill, Jefferson emphasized that its crucial in a democracy for citizens to be able to criticize public officials because legislators and religious leaders, being themselves fallible and uninspired, will always try to impose their own opinions and modes of thinking on others. His prediction came to a head in the controversy of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, where the Federalist Congress made it a crime to criticize the Federalist President, John Adams, but not the Republican Vice President, Thomas Jefferson. And Madison, once again, echoed Jeffersons views in his Virginia Resolution, which said the Sedition Act ought to produce universal alarm, because it is levelled against that right of freely examining public characters and measures which is the only effectual guardian of every other right.
3. Free speech is necessary for the discovery and spread of political truth.
Jefferson concludes his Religious Freedom Bill with words expressing his unshakeable faith in the power of reasoned deliberation to distinguish truth from error, words that are inscribed in marble on the Jefferson Memorial in Washington: truth is great and will prevail if left to herself; she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate.
4. Free speech allows the public discussion necessary for democratic self-government.
Jefferson believed that in a democracy, all citizens have an equal right and responsibility to exercise their rights of conscience. As Jefferson put it in his Virginia Bill, proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right.
On the Supreme Court, in the greatest free speech opinion of the twentieth century, Justice Louis Brandeis distilled Jeffersons four reasons for protecting free speech into a few inspiring paragraphs. In the case, Whitney v. California, we see the first Jewish Justice insisting on the right of Anita Whitney, a white woman, to make a speech defending anti-lynching laws, which were designed to protect the life and liberty of African Americans. Whitney made her speech at a Communist Party meeting, and she was convicted under a California law that made it a crime to associate with organizations that advocated doctrines that might lead to people to break the law. In 1926, Brandeis had read Jeffersons original draft of the Virginia Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom. In his Whitney opinion in 1927, Brandeis adopted and refined Jeffersons standard for ensuring that government could only punish overt acts of lawbreaking, not the expression of dangerous opinions.
As Brandeis put it in Whitney, Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears. To justify suppression of free speech there must be reasonable ground to fear that serious evil will result if free speech is practiced. [And] There must be reasonable ground to believe that the danger apprehended is imminent.
Brandeiss inspiring test government can ban speech only if its intended to and likely to cause imminent and serious injury was based on his Jeffersonian faith in the power of what he called free and fearless reasoning to expose falsehood through public discussion. As Brandeis put it, If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence. Only an emergency can justify repression. Brandeiss test was finally adopted by the Supreme Court in 1969. As a result, the United States Supreme Court now protects free speech more vigorously than any other judiciary in the world.
Brandeis went on to summarize Jeffersons four reasons for why government cannot make laws designed to restrict what Jefferson called the illimitable freedom of the human mind. And in the process he achieved a kind of constitutional poetry. I will now read Brandeiss central passage listen closely for each of Jeffersons four reasons: freedom of conscience, democratic accountability, discovery of truth, and democratic self-government.
Those who won our independence believed that the final end of the state was to make men free to develop their faculties and that in its government the deliberative forces should prevail over the arbitrary. They valued liberty both as an end and as a means. They believed liberty to be the secret of happiness and courage to be the secret of liberty. [Thats a quotation from Pericles funeral oration]. They believed that freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth; that without free speech and assembly discussion would be futile; that with them, discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine; that the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people; that public discussion is a political duty; and that this should be a fundamental principle of the American government.
But as this paragraph shows, all four of Jefferson and Brandeiss reasons for protecting free speech are based on an Enlightenment faith in reason itself. The First Amendment is based on a faith that people will take the time to develop their faculties of reason, through education and public discussion; that public deliberation will check arbitrary and partisan demagogues rather than enable them; that more speech will lead to the spread of more truth rather than more falsehood; and that people will, in fact, take time for discussion and deliberation, rather than make impulsive decisions.
This founding faith in reason is being questioned in our polarized age of social media. Twitter, Facebook, and other platforms are based on a business model thats now being called enrage to engage. They have accelerated public discourse to warp speed, creating virtual versions of the mob. Inflammatory posts based on passion travel farther and faster than arguments based on reason. Rather than encouraging deliberation, mass media undermine it by creating bubbles and echo chambers in which citizens see only those opinions they already embrace. For these reasons, some are calling for Americas free speech tradition to be reconsidered or abandoned.
Here at the National Constitution Center, by contrast, we are proud to reaffirm the faith in reasoned deliberation by consecrating the 45 words that will shine forever in this hallowed space. As a vital platform for non partisan education and debate, we bring together Americans of different perspectives to cultivate their faculties of reason. Only by listening to the best arguments on all sides of the constitutional questions at the center of American life can all of us exercise our right and duty to make up our own minds. Like Jefferson and Brandeis and Frederick Douglass and Ruth Bader Ginsburg and all of the great free speech heroes of America history, we are dedicated to preserving, protecting, and defending what Jefferson called the illimitable freedom of the human mind. May the shining words of the First Amendment Tablet inspire future generations with this self-evident truth: reason will always combat error as long as individuals are free to follow the dictates of conscience wherever it boldly leads. On behalf of all of us at the National Constitution Center, thanks again to Jan Neuharth and Judge Luttig for making this memorable ceremony possible, and thanks to all of you for joining us.
Download Speech Transcript
Read more here:
From Jefferson to Brandeis: The First Amendment, the Declaration, and the Constitution - National Constitution Center
- Publishing Pro-Hamas Propaganda Is Protected by First Amendment - Reason - February 7th, 2025 [February 7th, 2025]
- "Title VI Must Be Applied Consistent with First Amendment Principles" - Reason - February 7th, 2025 [February 7th, 2025]
- Coming soon: Executive Watch Tracking the Trump Administrations free speech record First Amendment News 456 - Foundation for Individual Rights and... - February 7th, 2025 [February 7th, 2025]
- Q&A: Professor emphasizes the impact the TikTok ban could have on the First Amendment - Elon News Network - February 7th, 2025 [February 7th, 2025]
- First Amendment Audit of ELPD Draws Widespread Attention Online - East Lansing Info - February 7th, 2025 [February 7th, 2025]
- Groups demand U.S. attorney for D.C. respect First Amendment - Freedom of the Press Foundation - February 7th, 2025 [February 7th, 2025]
- Maryland age assurance lawsuit shows NetChoice digging in on First Amendment - Biometric Update - February 7th, 2025 [February 7th, 2025]
- What does the first amendment protect during public comment? - Spectrum News 1 - February 7th, 2025 [February 7th, 2025]
- FOX News Trey Yingst to be honored at First Amendment Awards - Editor And Publisher Magazine - February 7th, 2025 [February 7th, 2025]
- NetChoice sues to block Marylands Kids Code, saying it violates the First Amendment - The Verge - February 7th, 2025 [February 7th, 2025]
- Stevens: Oklahoma tests First Amendment in move to fund Catholic charter school - The Post and Courier - February 7th, 2025 [February 7th, 2025]
- OPINION: Keeping the First Amendment on Facebook - Lebanon Reporter - February 7th, 2025 [February 7th, 2025]
- RFK Jr. wants to ban pharma ads on TV. The First Amendment may have something to say. - MSNBC - February 1st, 2025 [February 1st, 2025]
- Standing Up for the First Amendment: The Roundtable Submits Comment Letter Opposing Amicus Brief Disclosure Requirements - Philanthropy Roundtable - February 1st, 2025 [February 1st, 2025]
- Trial begins in First Amendment suit against St. John the Baptist Parish - The Lens NOLA - February 1st, 2025 [February 1st, 2025]
- RCFP reviews Pam Bondis record on newsgathering, First Amendment issues - Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press - February 1st, 2025 [February 1st, 2025]
- Texas county challenges First Amendment ruling on library book bans in 5th Circuit hearing - Yahoo! Voices - February 1st, 2025 [February 1st, 2025]
- Trump "Global Gag Rule" as to Abortion Likely Doesn't Violate the First Amendment - Reason - February 1st, 2025 [February 1st, 2025]
- It was a violation of our First Amendment rights: FIU students react to the TikTok ban - PantherNOW - February 1st, 2025 [February 1st, 2025]
- CWRU First Amendment clinic receives crucial grant from the Stanton Foundation - Crain's Cleveland Business - February 1st, 2025 [February 1st, 2025]
- Matt Gaetz says the First Amendment was "harmed gravely" by January 6 prosecutions - Media Matters for America - January 26th, 2025 [January 26th, 2025]
- New FCC Chair Revives Complaints About ABC, CBS And NBC Content That His Predecessor Rejected As "At Odds With The First Amendment" -... - January 26th, 2025 [January 26th, 2025]
- Trumps stated promise: Stop all government censorship and his free speech Executive Order First Amendment News 454 - Foundation for Individual Rights... - January 26th, 2025 [January 26th, 2025]
- We Must Protect The First Amendment At All Costs vs. No Thanks, Ill Just Take My Freedoms For Granted Until They Disappear - The Onion - January 26th, 2025 [January 26th, 2025]
- TikTok and the First Amendment Robert G. Natelson - Law & Liberty - January 26th, 2025 [January 26th, 2025]
- De Pere man sued city of Green Bay for violating his First Amendment rights. The city settled. - Green Bay Press Gazette - January 26th, 2025 [January 26th, 2025]
- UChicago Student Sues University, Alleging First Amendment and Tenant Rights Violations - The Chicago Maroon - January 26th, 2025 [January 26th, 2025]
- Dr. Rand Paul Introduces Free Speech Protection Act to Safeguard Americans First Amendment Rights Against Government Censorship - Senator Rand Paul - January 26th, 2025 [January 26th, 2025]
- Capistrano School District Accused of Trampling First Amendment Rights of Student - California Globe - January 26th, 2025 [January 26th, 2025]
- Jerry Zahorchak | Keeping the First Amendment on Facebook | Columns | tribdem.com - TribDem.com - January 26th, 2025 [January 26th, 2025]
- 2 blockbuster cases about the First Amendment and online speech - The Hill - January 26th, 2025 [January 26th, 2025]
- The First Amendment is First for a Reason - The Wilson Quarterly - January 26th, 2025 [January 26th, 2025]
- Takeaways from the Supreme Courts TikTok decision and what it may mean for the First Amendment - CNN - January 19th, 2025 [January 19th, 2025]
- Oral Argument in TikTok v. Garland: Does the First Amendment Apply, and How? - The Federalist Society - January 19th, 2025 [January 19th, 2025]
- TikTok, HamHom, and the First Amendment - Reason - January 19th, 2025 [January 19th, 2025]
- Supreme Court weighs First Amendment rights and porn in Texas case - NPR - January 19th, 2025 [January 19th, 2025]
- "Strong stand for the First Amendment": TikTok announces U.S. return after Trump promise to stay ban - Salon - January 19th, 2025 [January 19th, 2025]
- FCCs Rosenworcel Takes Parting Swipe at Incoming Trump Administration Over First Amendment - TV Technology - January 19th, 2025 [January 19th, 2025]
- Upholding TikTok ban, Supreme Court attacks First Amendment ahead of Trump inauguration - WSWS - January 19th, 2025 [January 19th, 2025]
- Rand Paul Reacts to TikTok Ruling: 'Violation of the First Amendment' - Newsweek - January 19th, 2025 [January 19th, 2025]
- Supreme Court Denies TikTok First Amendment Pass, Effectively Shuttering the Social Media Platform in the U.S. on Jan. 19 Unless Sold to Third Party -... - January 19th, 2025 [January 19th, 2025]
- "Satan loves the First Amendment" banner lawsuit allowed to proceed against Broward schools - CBS News - January 6th, 2025 [January 6th, 2025]
- Claim Against School Board That Refused to Display "Satan Loves the First Amendment" Banner Can Go Forward - Reason - January 6th, 2025 [January 6th, 2025]
- First Amendment gives way to national security: Countdown on for TikTok - Virginia Mercury - January 6th, 2025 [January 6th, 2025]
- Settlement puts Disneys business interests above First Amendment - Freedom of the Press Foundation - January 6th, 2025 [January 6th, 2025]
- Federal Judge Temporarily Blocks Protect Tennessee Minors Act Over First Amendment Concerns - SValleyNow.com | Local News for Marion County and the... - January 6th, 2025 [January 6th, 2025]
- Sullivan and the Central Meaning of the First Amendment Lee Levine & Matthew Schafer - Law & Liberty - January 1st, 2025 [January 1st, 2025]
- Tennessee age verification law blocked from taking effect due to First Amendment concerns - WZTV - January 1st, 2025 [January 1st, 2025]
- FIRE to SCOTUS: TikTok ban violates Americans' First Amendment rights - Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression - January 1st, 2025 [January 1st, 2025]
- Ald. Jim Gardiner Agrees to Pay $157K to Settle Lawsuit Claiming He Violated First Amendment by Blocking Critics From Official Facebook Page - WTTW... - January 1st, 2025 [January 1st, 2025]
- First Amendment the first casualty in Oklahoma school chiefs weird war on woke | Opinion - Wichita Eagle - January 1st, 2025 [January 1st, 2025]
- Donald Trump Asks Supreme Court to Delay TikTok Ban Over First Amendment Concerns - TheWrap - January 1st, 2025 [January 1st, 2025]
- How Washington State Stifles the First Amendment for the Incarcerated - Solitary Watch - December 22nd, 2024 [December 22nd, 2024]
- Opinion | Theres Still Time for the Senate to Support the First Amendment - The New York Times - December 22nd, 2024 [December 22nd, 2024]
- First Amendment Censorship Claims Against Stanford Internet Observatory Can Go Forward to Discovery as to Jurisdiction and Standing - Reason - December 22nd, 2024 [December 22nd, 2024]
- S. Ct. Will Hear First Amendment Challenge to TikTok Divestment on Jan. 10 - Reason - December 22nd, 2024 [December 22nd, 2024]
- Counterpoint: Reporters shouldnt have more First Amendment rights than the rest of us - Citrus County Chronicle - December 22nd, 2024 [December 22nd, 2024]
- Deal reached in First Amendment -Facebook lawsuit against Ald. Gardiner, as city agrees to pay some costs - Nadig Newspapers - December 22nd, 2024 [December 22nd, 2024]
- Iowa Republicans are afraid of the First Amendment - Bleeding Heartland - December 22nd, 2024 [December 22nd, 2024]
- TikTok Asks Supreme Court to Block Law Banning Its U.S. Operations - The New York Times - December 18th, 2024 [December 18th, 2024]
- Supreme Court agrees to hear TikToks First Amendment challenge to U.S. ban if not sold - Spectrum News NY1 - December 18th, 2024 [December 18th, 2024]
- Chris Hayes Says Trumps Media Lawsuits Are Meant to Open the Floodgates to Overturn Key First Amendment Rights | Video - Yahoo! Voices - December 18th, 2024 [December 18th, 2024]
- Media on the run: A sign of things to come in Trump times? First Amendment News 451 - Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression - December 18th, 2024 [December 18th, 2024]
- KERC Approves First Amendment to Multi-Year Transmission, Distribution, and Retail Supply Tariff Regulations 2024 - SolarQuarter - December 18th, 2024 [December 18th, 2024]
- Masked Protests and First Amendment Rights The Chickenman Case in Smyrna - Wgnsradio - December 18th, 2024 [December 18th, 2024]
- First Amendment attorneys say Ohio bill aimed at curbing antisemitism may infringe on rights - 10TV - December 18th, 2024 [December 18th, 2024]
- First Amendment warning: 100% chance of Ryan Walters tweeting - NonDoc - December 18th, 2024 [December 18th, 2024]
- Chris Hayes Says Trump's Media Lawsuits Are Meant to 'Open the Floodgates' to Overturn Key First Amendment Rights | Video - TheWrap - December 18th, 2024 [December 18th, 2024]
- SJC expands First Amendment protection to true threats over the Internet, by text, and in person - The Boston Globe - December 14th, 2024 [December 14th, 2024]
- OPINION: The First Amendment is the Biggest Story of the 2024 Presidential Election - Nevada Globe - December 14th, 2024 [December 14th, 2024]
- First Amendment: Anathema or weapon? - Workers World - December 14th, 2024 [December 14th, 2024]
- Justices Will Hear First Amendment Challenge to Denial of Tax Exemption for Catholic Charities - Law.com - December 14th, 2024 [December 14th, 2024]
- The Press and The People Must Not Willingly Surrender First Amendment Rights to Trump - Daily Kos - December 14th, 2024 [December 14th, 2024]
- La. TikTok creator says potential app ban infringes on First Amendment right - KPLC - December 14th, 2024 [December 14th, 2024]
- Opinion | The TikTok Ruling Is a Blow for the First Amendment and Free Speech - The New York Times - December 10th, 2024 [December 10th, 2024]
- TikTok failed to save itself with the First Amendment - The Verge - December 10th, 2024 [December 10th, 2024]
- Newsoms War on Political Speech: ADF Defends Rumble in the First Amendment Case - California Family Council - December 10th, 2024 [December 10th, 2024]
- Opinion | The TikTok Sale and the First Amendment - The Wall Street Journal - December 8th, 2024 [December 8th, 2024]
- Secret court hearing threatens the First Amendment and more - The Hill - December 8th, 2024 [December 8th, 2024]
- President Trump lacks standing: CBS rubbishes lawsuit over Kamala Harris 60 Minutes interview as procedurally baseless and prohibited by the First... - December 8th, 2024 [December 8th, 2024]