Blog Post #6

Antiwar Voices - Why Do We Never Hear Them?

The U.S. Supreme Court

Dissent is "the expression or holding of opinions at variance with those previously, commonly, or officially held." Within the law, dissent is so utterly important, and pertains to an opinion that goes against an already-prevailing idea. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects the right to dissent, as it "protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference." The U.S. Supreme Court has had dissenting opinions in the past themselves, which have consequently changed the way that following court cases are looked at and decided. When the Supreme Court Justices come to a new common interpretation of a certain part of the Constitution, and change the way in which a case would have originally been decided, they are going against the precedent.

Protest in Front of the Supreme Court

One of the most influential and important dissenting opinions in U.S. history was in Yates v. United States (1957). Prior, in 1951, the Supreme Court decided on the case Dennis v. United States. In this decision, the Supreme Court supported the convictions of 11 members of the American Communist Party, including Eugene Dennis, for violating the Smith Act. The Smith Act, also known as the Alien Registration Act, made it illegal to advocate for the violent overthrow of the government, or to organize or be a part of an organization that was devoted to such. The Supreme Court found in Dennis v. United States that, in a 6-to-2 decision, the Smith Act did not violate the First Amendment. Just 6 years later, in the case Yates v. United States, the Supreme Court negated and reversed the ruling from Dennis v. United States, stating that the only instances of speech that are unconstitutional and illegal are those that pose a "clear and present danger". This doctrine, to be put simply, determines what kinds of speech, press, and assemblies can be limited by the First Amendment, and consequently, the government.

A Speech in Front of the U. S. Capital

There are many online websites that act as a place for people to freely write and post their opinions that go against the norm, the majority, or the government. Two examples of such websites are Antiwar.com and The American Conservative. Antiwar.com's description is "Your best source for antiwar news, viewpoints, and activities". The description for The American Conservative is that it "exists to advance a 'Main Street' conservatism that opposes unchecked power in government and business...and embraces realism and restraint in foreign affairs based on America's vital national interests." The opinions that are presented on these websites are very strong - yet they aren't as widely publicized or shown throughout other sources of media. This is all due to the content and the messages that are published and posted. On websites such as these, there's deep analysis and emotional commentary on events and happenings around the nation and the world. On mainstream media, however, there's well thought-out and carefully worded responses to these same events. Mainstream media sources are more concerned about presenting the information to their audiences, and in-return receiving money for their presentations of the affairs. Mainstream media sources think about how different audiences will react to the material that they put out, whether that be right versus left-leaning groups, the government, etc., while sources such as Antiwar.com and The American Conservative act as a place for people to openly speak/write about what they want and how they feel without the worry or focus of backlash from sharing their true opinions.

Free Speech Art

The freedom of speech does include the right to not speak, to use offensive words to convey political messages, and to engage in symbolic speech. The freedom of speech does not, however, include the right to incite imminent lawless action, or to make/distribute obscene materials, as can be seen on the Judicial Branch of the U.S. Government's website. It is so utterly important for United States citizens to know and understand their rights under the Constitution of the United States, and with that, to exercise the very rights that are granted to them.