John Frohnmayer Quotes

Criticism of government finds sanctuary in several portions of the 1st Amendment. It is part of the right of free speech. It embraces freedom of the press.

Peacable assembly for lawful discussion cannot be made a crime.

Free speech, free press, free religion, the right of free assembly, yes, the right of petition—well, they are still radical ideas.

Thankfully, we live in country, unlike Russia, where we have First Amendment rights.

I don't want our right to be able to speak and dissent to be taken away.

India is the biggest democracy. We have the right to say what we want to say, and people have the right to protest.

I'm not interested in censorship. I like the First Amendment very much.

I try to do that in this book without preaching - to try to do as you just said that you really have to defend the First Amendment rights of everybody.

In America it's live by the sword of freedom of expression and be will to die by it as well.

No one respects the First Amendment more than I do. People have a right to express their concerns and their hopes and dreams to their government.

One who comes to the Court must come to adore, not to protest. That's the new gloss on the 1st Amendment.

People have a right to criticize.

I begin to feel like most Americans don't understand the First Amendment, don't understand the idea of freedom of speech, and don't understand that it's the responsibility of the citizen to speak out.

A simple way to determine whether the right to dissent in a particular society is being upheld is to apply the town square test: Can a person walk into the middle of the town square and express his or her views without fear of arrest, imprisonment, or physical harm? If he can, then that person is living in a free society. If not, it's a fear society.

We had a responsibility to represent all people whose 1st Amendment rights were at risk

An unconditional right to say what one pleases about public affairs is what I consider to be the minimum guarantee of the 1st Amendment.

How can that popular will express itself except by meetings, by speeches, by publications, by petitions, and by addresses to the representatives of the people? Any man who seeks to set a limit upon those rights, whether in war or peace, aims a blow at the most vital part of our government.... And before this great fundamental right [freedom of speech] every other must, if necessary, give way, for in no other manner can representative government be preserved.

The rights of free speech and free press do not carry with them the right to advocate the right to advocate the destruction of the very government that protects the freedom of an individual to express his views.

If the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech and press is to mean anything, it must allow protests even against the moral code that the standard of the day sets for the community.

It was not by accident or coincidence that the rights to freedom in speech and press were coupled in a single guaranty with the rights of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition for redress of grievances. All these, though not identical, are inseparable. They are cognate rights, and therefore are united in the first Article's assurance.

The First Amendment is often inconvenient. But that is beside the point. Inconvenience does not absolve the government of its obligation to tolerate speech.

People have the right to protest - that's what democracy is all about. I have no problem with people exercising their democratic rights.

One of the great rights as an American citizen is freedom of speech, one of the things that makes this country what it is.

We congratulate American freedom of speech and all who still believe in it.

We have a beautiful right in this country, which is freedom of speech.