FluxBlog

Dr. Renata Moon on her own time traveled to Washington DC at the request of a US Senator to speak as one of many on a panel of doctors with questions about the response to COVID-19. The Chair of the WSU Elson S. Floyd School of Medicine took it upon himself to file a complaint to the Washington Medical Commission, alleging her words had been misinformation.

But for Dr. Moon and her defenders, her words were not only true but protected speech under the First Amendment. As a child of immigrants, she has first-hand experience of the impact on a society losing free speech.

Featuring a column written following a personal interview in Spokane in March 2024, with reader feedback and more on defending the First Amendment.

REFERENCE LINKS:

Original column: https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2024/mar/28/sue-lani-madsen-speaking-freely-has-a-high-cost-fo/

For links to documents related to Dr. Moon, WSU and the Washington Medical Commission: https://silentmajorityfoundation.org/renatamoon/

Stockton et al v Ferguson et al: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/washington/waedce/2:2024cv00071/106227

Justice Robert Jackson’s opinion in a case called  Thomas v. Collins from 1945, quoted in the complaint filed with the District Court:

“It is not the right of the state to protect the public against false doctrine. The very purpose of the First Amendment is to foreclose public authority from assuming a guardianship of the public mind through regulating the press, speech, and religion. In this field every person must be his own watchman for truth, because the forefathers did not trust any government to separate the true from the false for us. Nor would I. Very many are the interests which the state may protect against the practice of an occupation, very few are those it may assume to protect against the practice of propagandizing by speech or press. These are thereby left great range of freedom. This liberty was not protected because the forefathers expected its use would always be agreeable to those in authority or that its exercise always would be wise, temperate, or useful to society. As I read their intentions, this liberty was protected because they knew of no other way by which free men could conduct representative democracy.”

Pres. Brack Obama in 2015: https://www.thefire.org/news/president-obama-student-protests-should-embrace-free-speech

“[We] have these values of free speech. And it’s not free speech in the abstract. The purpose of that kind of free speech is to make sure that we are forced to use argument and reason and words in making our democracy work. And, you know, you don’t have to be fearful of somebody spouting bad ideas. Just out-argue them. Beat ’em. Make the case as to why they’re wrong. Win over adherents. That’s how things work in a democracy.”

The First Amendment of the US Constitution:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

ncG1vNJzZmirpZq5orrIppidq5Wje7TBwayrmpubY7CwuY6pZp2qXaeyr63TmmSmp5%2BjeqK6w2aroZ1dm7azv9NmmKadnpm6prrT