Walz’s War on Words: A Blatant Distortion of the First Amendment

It was a fittingly strange night for politics in America on Tuesday, as the nation's supposed champions of freedom gathered in the ring, with over 43.15 million spectators watching. Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, perhaps needing a crash course on his own nation's Constitution, took an ill-advised swing at the First Amendment during the vice presidential debate. Walz asserted, once again, his enduring but erroneous belief that "hate speech" is somehow not protected under the First Amendment. Somewhere, James Madison must have sighed.

This week, Walz found himself across from JD Vance, the vice presidential candidate running with Donald Trump. Vance, who clearly has been prepping for this bout, came out swinging—not just at Walz, but at the entire ethos of censorship infecting American politics.

Governor Walz, with an air of paternalism, tried to remind everyone that America must be protected from itself. For Walz, the Founders, in their infinite wisdom, clearly must have left a footnote somewhere that justified silencing "hate speech"—because in his mind, keeping people from saying nasty things about one another is precisely the business of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

What Walz conveniently ignores—along with most politicians who dabble in speech-policing—is that someone, somewhere, always gets to decide which ideas make it to the "acceptable" side of the line. And when those lines get drawn, it’s generally politically powerful with the crayons. Walz doesn't seem to mind being one of those wielding the crayon, and he’s more than happy to add a little shade of red around what qualifies as “hate speech.” He clearly believes that someone needs to be the grown-up in the room, and he’s happy to volunteer for the job.

…