But altering free-speech protections out of concern for Obama could have devastating implications for our collective right to criticize political authority. Think back to 2004: even though the nation was engaged in multiple wars and guarding against another 9/11 — and even though President George W. Bush was genuinely despised by a healthy segment of the populace — author Nicholson Baker was still free to write and publish Checkpoint, a novel in which two men debate taking Bush's life. And two years later, the British mockumentary Death of a President— in which Bush's (simulated) assassination is followed by a third Patriot Act and a massive crackdown on civil liberties — was allowed to open in the United States, despite public condemnation and the unwillingness of some theater chains to screen it.
The ancillary effects of such a hypothetical expansion also need to be considered. New restrictions on anti-Obama speech could legitimize paranoid conservative fears that Obama plans to silence his opponents, for example — thereby exacerbating anti-Obama animus. Consider, too, that by making hateful attitudes known, the First Amendment allows society to respond in kind. "The theory of the First Amendment actually makes a lot of social sense," notes Silverglate. "It's very useful to know who wants to hang the Jews and the blacks." Penalize the ugliest anti-Obama speech, and this benefit vanishes.
If you're an Obama booster who thinks concern for his safety might justify even an incremental erosion of free speech, ask yourself: did Checkpoint and Death of a President bother you at the time? Do they bother you now? (Be honest.) And how would you feel if — four or eight years from now — expanded limits on speech that originated during an Obama administration led to the censorship of texts deemed too threatening to, say, President Sarah Palin?
"We need to have historical humility," says Nadine Strossen, the former president of the American Civil Liberties Union and a professor at New York Law School. "Each era tends to have historical hubris — 'This is the greatest danger ever posed to the values we hold most dear.' We tend always to exaggerate the danger — and to unnecessarily cut off civil liberties."
Related:
A long-silent civil-rights heroine comes to Maine, Lawmakers to probe prison, Queer eye for the Hawkeyes, More 
- A long-silent civil-rights heroine comes to Maine
It's a writer's dream — to stumble across a story, a figure, or a moment in time, that influenced our history but remains relatively untouched by the hands of academia or pop culture.
- Lawmakers to probe prison
For years controversy has churned over the Maine State Prison's treatment of both inmates and correctional officers. For the first time, legislators have taken action.
- Queer eye for the Hawkeyes
This past Monday, as Iowa prepared to officially issue marriage licenses to gay applicants, both law-enforcement and state gay groups prepared for vocal, even violent opposition in America's heartland.
- Gender balance
Diversity isn’t even just about being open-minded. In the end, it’s about fairness.
- Play-by-play
On the front lines at the gay-marriage hearing
- Do it like we used to do
There's a lot to be said for what opponents of same-sex nuptials call "traditional marriage."
- Sotomayor's mixed message on free speech
Minutes after President Barack Obama announced that he was nominating appellate judge Sonia Sotomayor for the vacant seat on the Supreme Court, battle lines were drawn on the pre-scripted questions of "post-racial" America.
- The 12th Annual Muzzle Awards
With the era of repression and secrecy fostered by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney finally over, this should be the best of times for freedom of expression, open government, and civil liberties. Yet change comes slowly.
- Back to the barricades
In the fall of 2005, when the artist and curator Mark Tribe began teaching at Brown University, he was struck by how little protest there was on campus at a time of war.
- Search party
These days, the morning commute is hardly complete without a newspaper, coffee, and potential violation of one's Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure .
- The DEA says no (again) to medical marijuana. Now what?
Rick Doblin, president of Belmont-based Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), can't believe how long it's dragged on.
- Less
Topics:
Media -- Dont Quote Me
, Barack Obama, Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, civil liberties, More
, Barack Obama, Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, civil liberties, Supreme Court, Sarah Palin, ACLU, Jews, Anthony Lewis, Anthony Lewis, free-speechings, Less
