This article was originally published in the Portland Press Herald
The First Amendmentโs guarantee of freedom of speech is under attack in Maine. The attackers include Maine Attorney General Janet Mills, the editorial page editors of Maineโs largest daily newspapers, the Maine chapters of the League of Women Voters and the American Civil Liberties Union, and Sens. Susan Collins and Angus King and Rep. Chellie Pingree.
Mills is a serial abuser of the First Amendment. In 2015 she chose to prosecute pro-life protesters outside Planned Parenthood in Portland for allegedly speaking too loudly. Despite being clearly told by a Barack Obama-appointed U.S. district judge thatย this is protected speech,ย she persists, arguing that the government may indeed abridge political speech.
In 2016, Mills joined a partisan coalition of state attorneys generalย investigating Exxonย and climate change โdeniersโ for โfraud.โ The investigation started withย a memoย that protected the attorneys general from Freedom of Information requests and was followed by broadย subpoenas to several prominent think tanks. Exxon hasย countersuedย for violation of their First Amendment rights. The investigation is clearly designed to suppress speech that Mills opposes, and to aid her in the Democratic gubernatorial primary. The ACLUโs Maine chapter sawย nothing at all problematicย with this behavior.
In 2010ย Citizens Unitedย sent progressivesย into orbitย when it guaranteed protected political speech rights of unions and corporations.ย King,ย Pingreeย andย the League of Women Voters havenโt had anything positive to say about Citizens United, and Collins wasย a strong supporterย of the challenged McCain-Feingold campaign finance legislation.
The opposition of Maineโs legacy media editors to free speech surfaced as a consequence ofย a Feb. 25 editorialย in the Portland Press Herald that took the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics to task for declining to investigate Maine Republican Party Executive Director Jason Savage and his anonymous ownership of and work on the Maine Examiner, a news website that published material deemed harmful to a progressive Lewiston mayoral candidate. I posted this comment under the editorial online andย all hell broke loose:
โjreisman: Hereโs an alternative view- the PPH. KJ, BDN and Maine Public are essentially mouthpieces for the Democrats and the left. Campaign Finance and ethics โregulationโ are progressive attacks on protected political speech.
โThe left has lost their monopoly on the narrative, and their ability to control/censor speech of those they disagree with has been compromised. This editorial is the consequence.
โWhat contempt for the public! Mainers and Americans can make their own decisions without direction from media progressives.โ
On Feb. 28, the editorial page editors of Maineโs three largest dailies appeared on Maine Public Radioโs โMaine Callingโ for their monthly news roundup and commentary. I sent the following email to the panel: โEditorial in PPH criticizes Maine Ethics Commission for declining to investigate Jason Savage/Maine Examiner. No mention of First Amendment/ Citizens United guarantee of protected political speech- how come?โ
Theirย responseย (starting at 31:30 of Maine Publicโs recording) is chilling. Greg Kesich of the Press Herald struggles to defend the lack of reference to protected political speech, recognizing First Amendment rights but noting problems with fake news, lack of accountability and dishonesty. The Bangor Daily Newsโ Susan Young and Ben Bragdon of the Kennebec Journal/Morning Sentinel pipe up about the need to update rules in the age of social media and its low set-up costs, suggesting that only legacy newspapers are โlegitimateโ and we need more โgoodโ news consumers. Not one editor thought it necessary to defend the First Amendment; all saw the โneedโ to abridge political speech.
I discovered I had been temporarily banned from the Press Herald comment section a few days later. Whether it was before or after the โMaine Callingโ show, only the Press Herald knows.
Two Maine pundits have since chimed in. Amy Friedย bloggedย that fake news is a public mental health hazard, setting the stage for the need to regulate political speech for the public good. Al Diamon defended the First Amendment,ย declaringย that โpolitical hacks have the same rights as everyone else to operate propaganda sites, even if, like Savage, theyโre the sorts of cowards who do so anonymously. Nowhere in the Constitutionโs First Amendment does it require the exercise of free speech to be conducted ethically.โ
Free speech is under attack nationally from the left and also from President Trump. College campuses have a predilection for suppressing conservative speech in the name of community and public health that University of Maine Professor Fried has channeled. Many believe that โhate speechโ asย defined by the Southern Poverty Law Centerย is not protected speech. Progressives sinceย Woodrow Wilsonย have argued that the Constitution is a barrier to โprogressโ and needs to be changed. In the past, the press, the academy and civil rights groups defended the First Amendmentโs guarantees of freedom of speech and religion. Today, not so much.


