The Right's First Amendment: The Politics of Free Speech & the Return of Conservative Libertarianism (Stanford Studies in Law and Politics) - Softcover

Batchis, Wayne

Softcover

ISBN 10: 0804798001 ISBN 13: 9780804798006

Publisher: Stanford University Press, 2016

Synopsis

Not so long ago, being aggressively "pro–free speech" was as closely associated with American political liberalism as being pro-choice, pro–affirmative action, or pro–gun control. With little notice, this political dynamic has been shaken to the core. The Right's First Amendment examines how conservatives came to adopt and co-opt constitutional free speech rights.

In the 1960s, free speech on college campuses was seen as a guarantee for social agitators, hippies, and peaceniks. Today, for many conservatives, it represents instead a crucial shield that protects traditionalists from a perceived scourge of political correctness and liberal oversensitivity. Over a similar period, free market conservatives have risen up to embrace a once unknown, but now cherished, liberty: freedom of commercial expression. What do these changes mean for the future of First Amendment interpretation?

Wayne Batchis offers a fresh entry point into these issues by grounding his study in both political and legal scholarship. Surveying six decades of writings from the preeminent conservative publication National Review alongside the evolving constitutional law and ideological predispositions of Supreme Court justices deciding these issues, Batchis asks the conservative political movement to answer to its judicial logic, revealing how this keystone of our civic American beliefs now carries a much more complex and nuanced political identity.

About this title

About the Author

Wayne Batchis is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Delaware.

Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.

The Right's First Amendment

The Politics of Free Speech & the Return of Conservative Libertarianism

By Wayne Batchis

STANFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

Copyright © 2016 Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University
All rights reserved.

ISBN: 978-0-8047-9800-6

Contents

Preface, 
Acknowledgments, 
Introduction: The Right's First Amendment, 
1. Conservatism, the First Amendment, and National Review, 
2. The Political Science of Judicial Decision Making, 
3. Political Correctness and the Rise of the Conservative Victim, 
4. The Courts and the Political Correctness Indictment, 
5. The Rise of Free-Market Conservatism, 
6. Commercial Speech in the Modern Era, 
7. Citizens United and the Paradox of Associational Speech, 
Conclusion, 
Notes, 
Index, 

CHAPTER 1

Conservatism, the First Amendment, and National Review

What is "conservatism?" As foundational components of the contemporary political lexicon, the word "conservative" and its purported polar opposite "liberal" are bandied about with reckless abandon. In the rough and tumble of everyday American politics, these terms may be used to validate one's policy preferences, to denigrate another's, or merely to represent one's preferred political team. In the United States, there is, of course, no mainstream political party that adopts these words as their own — there is no Liberal Party or Conservative Party per se as in many countries throughout the world — but there might as well be. For even as the two major parties continue to evolve and adapt to their changing constituencies, today the Democratic Party is generally characterized as liberal and the Republican Party is understood to be conservative. By extension, many members of the judiciary, appointed by these very party politicians, must endure these labels as well, even when such labels are unwelcome.

The word "conservative" does, of course, have a core meaning. The American Heritage Dictionary defines conservative as "favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change. Traditional or restrained in style. Moderate; cautious." However, it also offers these definitions: "Of or relating to the political philosophy of conservatism. Belonging to a conservative party, group, or movement." Thus, when a judge is identified as conservative, it may suggest that her decisions convey a greater degree of respect for tradition, restraint, and caution than is the norm for judges in her class — the median judge. However, use of the identifier "conservative" might also merely indicate that that particular judge is aligned with the Republican Party, that she was nominated by a Republican president, or that her judicial decision making is perceived to be tainted by an ideological bias.

One thing is clear: Conservatism is not monolithic. Political conservatives, just like liberals, do not always see eye-to-eye. As already alluded to, there are readily identifiable tensions that exist among conservatives, the most familiar being the sometimes-contradictory emphasis on economic freedom lauded by free-market conservatives and deeply rooted tradition celebrated by moralistic conservatives. These two ideological camps largely defined the conservative landscape in the years following World War II, a period that marked the emergence of a coherent conservative movement in America. These two strains of conservative thinking do not necessarily conflict — and may indeed be complementary. David Brooks recounted how when he joined the staff of National Review in 1984, "the magazine,

Edition details

• Publisher: Stanford University Press
• Publication date: 2016
• Language: English
• ISBN 10: 0804798001
• ISBN 13: 9780804798006
• Binding: Paperback
• Edition number: 1
• Number of pages: 296