The Re-Birth of the First Amendment

Friday, March 14, 2014


Fifty years ago, the Supreme Court made a decision in the case New York Times v Sullivan that would forever alter the way journalists practiced journalism. Brooke speaks with Andrew Cohen, contributing editor at The Atlantic and fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice, about the decision's impact on the First Amendment.

Supreme Court audio courtesy of Oyez®, a multimedia judicial archive at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law


Andrew Cohen

Hosted by:

Brooke Gladstone

Comments [1]

Mark Richard from Columbus, OH

The First Amendment isn't just for 'media' companies. Unfortunately, the NY Times opposes First Amendment rights for those - completely hypocritical, since the Times is a corporation which uses resources to influence elections and promote causes. The fig leaf is 'campaign finance reform'. Even their attorney in the Pentagon Papers case, Floyd Abrams, and the ACLU has abandoned Mr. Sulzberger on this. The newspaper's vigorous, practically brainless editorial page has argued that the Times deserves First Amendment protections because of its 'function', whereas the World Wide Widget Corporation's 'function' is to make widgets, therefore it is not entitled to the same political speech. All the assaults on the First Amendment seem to come from the Left wing these days - 'speech codes' on campuses, 'commercial speech' restrictions, and 'campaign finance reform', an Orwellian term. All are vigorously supported by Mr. Sulzberger, who apparently wants to restrict competition in the business of telling people what to think. So I'll temper my appreciation of the Caldwell decision and its long-term effects on freedom of speech.

Mar. 14 2014 05:01 PM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.