Twilight of Liberty: The Legacy of the ACLU by William A. Donohue

Author:William A. Donohue [Donohue, William A.]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: United States, Civil Rights, 20th Century, Political Science, Political Process, History, General
ISBN: 9780765807229
Google: rp_0nQEACAAJ
Goodreads: 5628422
Publisher: Routledge
Published: 1994-01-01T00:00:00+00:00

Is It “Speech”

The ACLU’s highly individualistic vision of liberty can also be seen in its approach to matters that bear directly on the political process. Should those who have been privy to the inner workings of government have the right to profit from their experience by engaging in lobbying activities after they have left government service? On this issue, President Reagan and the ACLU took the same position in opposing the Ethics in Government Act that was designed to stop such activity. The ACLU opposed legislation aimed at preventing top Reagan officials such as Michael Deaver, the former deputy chief of staff, from lobbying on behalf of foreign governments. The Union even came to the defense of Lyn Nofziger, former White House political director, when he was charged (and later convicted) of improperly lobbying former colleagues.

Given the ACLU’s absolutist approach to free speech, there is a certain consistency to its position. Indeed, because Deaver and Nofziger were Reagan insiders, there is an admirable nonpartisanship about the Union’s stance as well. Nonetheless, there are still some questions left outstanding. When do concerns about the integrity of the political process enter the picture? To be more exact, when, if ever, should such concerns override free speech interests? Unfortunately, the ACLU sheds little light on such questions. Its policy on campaign financing is similarly posed.

The ACLU opposes limitations on “contributions or expenditures made for the purpose of advocating causes or candidates in the public forum.” The Union does not accept the reasoning of the Supreme Court on this issue. The Court recognizes the legitimacy of putting limits on contributions but not on what a candidate chooses to spend. The high court reasons that everyone should be allowed to spend as much money as deemed desirable to distribute his or her political beliefs; contributions are different, as they may corrupt the integrity of the electoral process by allowing influence to be purchased. But for the ACLU, the principle of equal protection argues against drawing any distinction.44 In keeping with its policy, the Union adamantly opposes putting any restrictions on campaign spending, including funds spent by political action committees (PACs).45 The only alternative to the present system favored by the ACLU is public financing of campaigns.

Political persuasion is integral to a democracy. In the past, much of it occurred on the street corner, as pedestrians were cornered by activists of every stripe. Today, however, the mall has become the chief venue of pedestrian traffic—but with a noticeable difference: the absence of political punditry. Private malls maintain they have the right to limit speech and have done so with increasing frequency, over the objections of the ACLU. Comparing the mall to the village green in colonial America, civil libertarians maintain that the future of the First Amendment is at stake. ACLU board member Martin Margulies explains it this way: “Freedom of speech is useless unless the speaker has access to an audience—and the audiences today are at the malls, not in the publicly owned urban downtowns and village greens of old.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.