Mark Fowler Quotes

When I began we did not really have a lot of First Amendment law. It is really surprising to think of it this way, but a lot of the law - most of the law that relates to the First Amendment freedom of the press in America - is really within living memory.

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.

I think that, as Americans, we should never forget that when we tamper with freedom of speech, it is a very sensitive issue that affects all of our constitutional rights and privileges.

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.

Implicit in the history of the 1st Amendment is the rejection of obscenity as utterly without redeeming social importance.

The Constitution does not allow the unnecessary trammeling of free expression, even for the noblest of purposes.

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

The First Amendment is first for a reason - it cannot be ignored by the D.C. City Council.

I think the moment anybody seriously tampers with the First Amendment, you're going to see an outcry.

We still have a First Amendment that protects your business and free speech.

I believe in the First Amendment.

I want to regain my First Amendment rights.

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.

If Thomas Jefferson had heard us, he probably would have said, 'We shouldn't have free speech.'

The First Amendment is very important, but it's not everything.

The First Amendment is not without limits.

If government were free to suppress disfavored speech by preventing potential speakers from being paid, there would not be much left of the 1st Amendment.

For the first time in the 182 years since the founding if the Republic, the federal courts are asked to hold that the First Amendment does not mean what it says.

Under the privilege of the 1st Amendment many, many ridiculous things are said.

As a young constitutional lawyer, I was put to the first amendment test when I was called on to defend racists and neo-Nazis. I really had no choice. Surely now we know that none of us do. Free speech is unequivocal, unpolitical, and indivisible.

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.

If a corporation can express opinions and be protected in doing so by the First Amendment, then there's no reason logically one wouldn't think they could undertake to enjoy the other rights protected under the First Amendment.