Arguments Against The First Amendment

"On a constitutional foothold, the first amendment is a minefield of dead ends for what seems to be most legislation. Demonstrated by the recent uproar over net neutrality, our internet-driven society has led us to keep our first amendment rights under lock and key. Anything otherwise would be largely irresponsible of our government's constitutional duties. Society, after all, no longer lives in a world of just paper and pen. However, at the precise moment content online trespasses beyond the grotesque and profane limits we're used to – when we start to see sparks leading to terrorism and chatter of the slumbering beast that is Nazism – we should be compelled by our own moral virtues to rush forward and say, ""Stop. Talk like that does not belong in our country."" …show more content…
The government, however, has very little room to do so. The first amendment's scope over the government's authority to intervene in internet content, and its lack thereof, is a vast plateau that goes on without end. For the sake of argument, just last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that prohibition of profane trademarks is an unconstitutional violation of free speech under the first amendment. The Supreme Court, last June, struck down a disparagement clause in the Lanham Act that barred profanity and vulgar language processed through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The case that brought forward the issue is similar to the epidemic we see today. ""The Slants"" were an Asian-American band that was held from trademarking their name on the basis of the Lanham Act's disparagement clause. In comparison to mild profanity, the band name was a derogatory term against an ethnic group. In case briefs, it's been noted that despite the use of offensive language, ""adults have the First Amendment right to view and hear speech that is profane and