In today’s civics lesson we will review the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Freedom of expression consists of the rights to freedom of speech, press, assembly and to petition the government for a redress of grievances, and the implied rights of association and belief. The Supreme Court interprets the extent of the protection afforded to these rights. The First Amendment has been interpreted by the Court as applying to the entire federal government even though it is only expressly applicable to Congress. Furthermore, the Court has interpreted, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting the rights in the First Amendment from interference by state governments.

The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without interference or constraint by the government. The Supreme Court requires the government to provide substantial justification for the interference with the right of free speech where it attempts to regulate the content of the speech. A less stringent test is applied for content-neutral legislation.

Despite popular misunderstanding the right to freedom of the press guaranteed by the first amendment is not very different from the right to freedom of speech. It allows an individual to express themselves through publication and dissemination. It is part of the constitutional protection of freedom of expression. It does not afford members of the media any special rights or privileges not afforded to citizens in general.

Source: Legal Information Institute, Cornell University

So now that we have re-familiarized ourselves with the Constitution’s free speech protections, we know that Congress can pass no law infringing on of freedom of speech. We also know that the federal and state government can not deny this right to its employees.

Today’s question: What in the U.S. Constitution prohibits a PRIVATE employer from terminating an employee who exercises free speech in a manner that is considered inappropriate by the employer? For example, had CNN chosen to fire Eason Jordan for what he said at Davos, would CNN have been in violation of Jordan’s Constitutional rights?

Correct answer: NO. As several bloggers have recently learned, an employer can and will terminate an employee for the otherwise protected freedom of expression. Which is why we commonly say, free speech isn’t free. In our great nation we can say almost whatever we want, but sometimes those words will carry consequences. As long as it is not the government imposing those consequences, there is nothing illegal about it.

Thank you for your attention. Class dismissed.