Life. Liberty. The pursuit of happiness. The right to self-determination. Freedom. The right to bear arms. Free speech. These are often cited as uniquely American principles; they’re what separates us from the rest of the world. I want to focus on just free speech. Is it truly a founding American principle? The answer to that question is complex.

 Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798

In the context of our modern view of American founding principles, it’s hard to believe that free speech was outlawed a decade into the republic’s existence. President John Adams famously signed into law the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. The Alien acts are a separate topic, but the Sedition Acts specifically targeted freedom of the press. Newspapers were not allowed to criticize the Adams administration. Those that did were labelled “French sympathizers” under the looming threat of the “Quasi-War” with France.

It is interesting to note that when freedom of expression is outlawed at the federal level, it always happened during times of war. Adams, Lincoln and Wilson all passed sedition laws. The excuse that is given is that war gives the president unilateral authority to circumvent the Constitution, but this is a gross misinterpretation of executive powers. One can make the argument that war is when free speech is needed the most, as nearly every war in American history was started based on lies, or at the bare minimum, “factual, but not truthful” misleading.

Adams is a little bit different. Where Lincoln and Wilson used sedition acts to oppose any opposition to their actions, Adams was using the acts as a diplomacy tactic. He was trying to avoid war with France. Those with anti-Federalist leanings may have sympathized with the French in an effort to discredit the Adams administration.

It’s one of those cases of being right for the wrong reasons. What Adams did was a blatant violation of the First Amendment. But ultimately, Adams did avoid war with France. I’m no fan of either Adams, but they both had good-to-great foreign policy records. Despite that, the Sedition Acts destroyed Adams’ Federalist Party, made him a one-term president, and paved the way for the Jeffersonian/Virginia revolution.

But my question is, was Adams violating a “founding principle?” Yes and no. The Bill of Rights applies to the Federal government, not the states. The Bill of Rights is often portrayed as an ultimate say on the rights of man, when in reality, it was a compromise document. There were states that refused to join the Union without a Bill of Rights, expressly stating what the Federal government cannot do. This opens up a can of worms, as you’re now implying that the Federal government can regulate speech, or can regulate arms, by using specific language to outline what it cannot do. The Constitution only gives the Federal government expressly delegated powers.

So, Adams was abusing power by banning speech at the Federal level. This was what the critics of the original Union feared – trading one despotic central authority (Britain) for another. But what about the states that created the Federal government? How did they view free speech?

It depends on the state. Massachusetts (Adams home state) and others in New England had state religions. So in some ways, Adams was upholding the founding principles of his home. Virginia passed an Ordinance of Religious Freedom in 1786. Hamilton, for all his faults, argues for free speech in Federalist 84, and also argues against a Bill of Rights for the potential misinterpretation reasons I outlined. Religion and free press are not the same thing. But, with state religion, comes blasphemy law. These laws often censor or outlaw what we would view as free speech in a modern lens.

So to answer the question, free speech is an American tradition in that the American central government cannot restrict it. Free speech is not an American tradition in that the states which created the American government had different views on the topic. Even today, states can reserve the right to restrict speech and religion. The general government cannot.

But what if it could? What if the Sedition Laws of the Adams administration stuck? Or those of Lincoln and Wilson? What if the shift in the political tide did not move towards the Jeffersonians in 1800? The world we live in now would look much different.  BookmarkPublished in General