Although there has been a lot written about how counter-terrorism laws impact on human rights and civil liberties, most of this work has focussed on the most obvious or egregious kinds of human rights abrogation, such as extended detention, torture, and extraordinary rendition. Far less has been written about the complex ways in which Western governments have placed new and far-reaching limitations on freedom of speech in this context since 9/11. This book compares three liberal democracies - the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia, in particular showing the commonalities and similarities in what has occurred in each country, and the changes in the appropriate parameters of freedom of speech in the counter-terrorism context since 9/11, achieved both in policy change and the justification for that change. In all three countries much speech has been criminalized in ways that were considered anachronistic, or inappropriate, in comparable policy areas prior to 9/11. This is particularly interesting because other works have suggested that the United States' unique protection of freedom of speech in the First Amendment has prevented speech being limited in that country in ways that have been pursued in others. This book shows that this kind of argument misses the detail of the policy change that has occurred, and privileges a textual reading over a more comprehensive policy-based understanding of the changes that have occurred. The author argues that we are now living a new-normal for freedom of speech, within which restrictions on speech that once would have been considered aberrant, overreaching, and impermissible are now considered ordinary, necessary, and justified as long as they occur in the counter-terrorism context. This change is persistent, and it has far reaching implications for the future of this foundational freedom.

This annotated document collection surveys the history and evolution of laws and attitudes regarding free speech and censorship in the United States, with a special emphasis on contemporary events and controversies related to the First Amendment. The United States' collective understanding of First Amendment freedoms was formed by more than 200 years of tensions between the power of word and the power of the government. During that time, major laws and legal decisions defined the circumstances and degree to which personal expression could be rightfully expressed—and rightfully limited. This struggle to define the parameters of free speech continues today. Vibrant and passionate debates about First Amendment limitations once inspired by the dissemination of birth control information now address such issues as kneeling during the national anthem, removing controversial books from public libraries, attempts by the Trump administration to discredit the press, and disseminating false or hateful information through social media platforms. By exploring diverse examples of censorship victories and triumphs of free expression, readers will better understand the enormous impact of First Amendment freedoms on American society.

Following the events of 9/11, rashly conceived anti-terror laws were introduced that put civil liberties at risk. Free Speech in Fearful Times offers a unique perspective on how the laws created to "protect" us can actually harm us.

"The Constitution and 9/11 provides a comprehensive, striking, and disturbing analysis of executive misuse of power that is made all the more compelling by placing it in a rich and fascinating historical contest. No better book is available for placing post-9/11 government actions in the matrix of history and explaining how executive power has degraded the Constitution and citizen rights."--William G. Weaver--Back cover.

As the world faces the seemingly constant threat of terrorism, unprecedented corporate expansion, and the flourishing of new technologies, the nature and boundaries of free speech face new and mounting crises. This volume explores the challenges facing free speech post September 11, 2001, including the Patriot Act, commercial free speech, and consolidation of the media.

Essays on the challenges to academic freedom posed by post-9/11 political interventions and the growing commercialization of knowledge. Are the attacks on academic freedom after 9/11 a passing storm, or do they represent a structural shift that undermines one of the pillars of democratic societies? This book brings together some of this nation's leading scholars to analyze the challenges to academic freedom posed by post-9/11 political interventions and the market-driven commercialization of knowledge, examining these issues in light of the major transformations in the system of higher education since the Second World War, including conflicting interpretations of what constitutes academic freedom. Following an analysis of the historical significance of the post-9/11 threats to academic freedom, three strongly argued and not easily reconcilable essays by Robert Post, Judith Butler, and Philippa Strum discuss what visions of academic freedom can be defended and the best strategies for doing so. Three case studies--Kathleen J. Frydl on the loyalty-oath and free-speech controversies at the University of California, Amy Newhall on the tortured relationship between universities and the government as seen in language acquisition programs, and Joel Beinin on the policing of thought in the academy in relation to the Middle East--deepen our understanding of what is at stake. In clear and powerful prose, these essays provide a solid platform for informed classroom and public discussions on the philosophical foundations, institutional practices, and political dimensions of academic freedom on the threshold of the twenty-first century.

Although it is one of America¿s most basic rights, free speech historically has faced governmental limits. Utilizing objective overviews, primary sources, and full-color illustrations, this title examines Should Limits Be Placed on Free Speech? Should Speech Be Limited to Protect National Security? Should the Media Be Censored? Are the Free Speech Limits in the Patriot Act Justified'.

"Media Freedom under the Human Rights Act provides the most comprehensive analysis to date of the impact of Article 10 ECHR, as received through the Human Rights Act 1998, on the substantive law governing freedom of expression in the media."--BOOK JACKET.