In the 2011 case Brown v. Entertainment Seller Association, the Supreme Court struck down a California law prohibiting the sale of violent video games to minors. In the 7-2 decision, three Democratic nominees joined four Republican nominees. Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, “Minors are entitled to extensive First Amendment protections, and the government should only in relatively limited and clearly defined circumstances… It can prohibit the public distribution of protected materials to minors.”
States do have the power to protect children from harm, as evidenced by laws restricting children's access to alcohol and tobacco, but that power does not include the ability to “discriminate against ideas to which children may be exposed.'' “It does not include an unfettered power to restrict,” the majority opinion says. Said. Therefore, as the Court has repeatedly stated, “speech directed toward young people that is not obscene or otherwise subject to legitimate prohibitions may be used solely to protect young people from ideas or images that the legislature deems inappropriate for them.” cannot be suppressed.”
Lawmakers and parents may be irritated by this doctrine, but there is a real way to derail free speech insanity, even for children. In a 1982 free speech case, Island Trees School District v. Pico, Judge William Brennan questioned public school districts' efforts to remove “inappropriate” books from library shelves and sought to limit student speech. He wrote powerful pieces supporting freedom and student access. For ideas. “Just as access to ideas enables citizens in general to exercise their rights to free speech and the press in meaningful ways,” Brennan argued. I will soon become an adult member. ”
Judge Brennan is exactly right. We cannot shield our children from debate and dialogue and expect them to grow up as adults ready to embrace liberal democracy at university. Raising a population in a thriving republic is a process, and speech and expression cannot be banned across the board, even if that speech and expression poses social and emotional challenges for today's teens. .
Compounding the problem is that social media bans are almost always rooted, at least in part, in the content on the platform. Likes, comments, fashion, and trends are what keep people hooked on social media. But the First Amendment specifically abhors content discrimination. As the Supreme Court has repeatedly explained, one of the most fundamental principles of the First Amendment is that “generally speaking, the government has no right to limit expression on the basis of message, idea, subject matter, or content. There is no authority.''
