More than half of Americans say the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution go “too far.” One free speech advocacy group warns that such views are a “dictator’s fantasy” come true.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, formerly known as the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), released the results of the latest version of its National Speech Index on Thursday. The survey, which sampled the opinions of 1,000 Americans between July 5-10, is included quarterly as part of America’s Political Pulse, described as “an ongoing weekly survey conducted by the Polarization Research Lab, which will allow researchers to track shifting free speech sentiment in America over time.”
When provided with the text of the First Amendment and asked if it “goes too far in the rights it guarantees,” a plurality (47%) of respondents said the statement “does not describe my thoughts at all.” The remaining 53% believed, to varying degrees, that the First Amendment “goes too far.”
Get Our Latest News for FREE
Subscribe to get daily/weekly email with the top stories (plus special offers!) from The Christian Post. Be the first to know.
Nine percent “slightly” agreed that the First Amendment “goes too far,” while 16% said that the statement “somewhat” or “mostly” described their thoughts. Nearly one in eight of those surveyed “completely” agreed that the First Amendment “goes too far.”
Responding to its findings, FIRE said a larger share of Democrats (61%) saw the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment as too expansive than Republicans (52%).
“Evidently, one out of every two Americans wishes they had fewer civil liberties,” Chief Research Advisor Sean Stevens lamented. “Many of them reject the right to assemble, to have a free press, and to petition the government. This is a dictator’s fantasy.”
Respondents also demonstrated a high level of trust in the ability of the government to make “fair decisions about what speech is considered terrifying.” While a plurality of respondents (35%) said they did not trust the government “at all” to make such a determination, 27% said they trusted the government “somewhat” to determine what speech qualifies as terrifying, while the same percentage described themselves as “a little” confident in the government to identify terrifying speech.
Much smaller shares said they trusted the government very much (8%) or completely (3%) when it comes to policing what they deem as terrifying speech.
Similar findings emerged when analyzing respondents’ views about the government’s ability to make “fair decisions about what speech is considered” intimidating, threatening, harassing, annoying, disturbing and indecent. Americans were least likely to have confidence in the government when it came to determining which speech was annoying, with 44% indicating that they did not trust the government with this task, while 33% of respondents said the same about threatening speech.
Among all seven categories, the share of respondents who did not trust the government to determine what speech fit that criterion hovered in the mid to upper 30s with two exceptions, while the percentage of those surveyed who trusted the government “a little” with making such decisions ranged from 25% to 27%.
Between 22% and 27% trusted the government “somewhat” to make determinations about certain types of speech, and between 6% and 12% trusted the government “very much,” while between 3% and 4% trusted it “completely.”
When asked if they believe colleges and universities should “have police arrest student protesters opposing the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza” or if they should “allow the protests to continue as a matter of free speech,” a plurality of those surveyed (38%) thought that institutions of higher education should “allow the protests to continue,” while 28% supported having the protesters arrested.
“While many of the protests were lawful, some of the most high-profile protests included tent encampments, vandalism, and the occupation of buildings. These behaviors are not protected by the First Amendment and cannot be justified in the name of free speech,” Stevens added.
He cited Americans’ views about the pro-Palestinian, pro-Hamas protests as evidence that “Americans have little tolerance for some forms of protected speech and a lot of tolerance for unprotected conduct, when it should be the other way around.”
“The state of free speech in America is dire,” Stevens warned.
The research shows that most Americans agree with Stevens’ analysis, although not necessarily for the same reasons. Sixty-nine percent of those surveyed believed that things are going in the “wrong direction” in the U.S. “when it comes to whether people are able to freely express their views.” This constituted an increase from the 63% who felt this way in the April survey while matching the percentage who thought the state of free speech was headed in the “wrong direction” in January.
Just 5% of respondents viewed the right to freedom of speech in the U.S. as “completely secure,” while an additional 17% described it as “very secure.” Thirty-six percent characterized the right to freedom of speech as “somewhat secure,” while 30% classified it as “not very secure” and 12% categorized it as “not at all secure.”
Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be reached at: ryan.foley@christianpost.com
