ALT A blue screen has the Mercatus Center at George Mason University logo on the left. On the right is text that says: Are There Limits to Free Speech? Vero de Rugy, Henry Oliver, Ben Brophy, Jack Salmon, Nathan Goodman Moderated by Rebecca Lowe

ALT So, as my excellent co-panelists have already argued today, free speech serves at least two key values. As Ben eloquently told us, free speech is important for freedom of conscience and for our capacity as individuals to develop ourselves. As Jack just illustrated for us in a Hayekian sense, freedom of speech is important for creating a society that can learn, adjust, and develop. Scientific progress has always resulted from scientists developing theories that dissent from prevailing theories. Likewise, political and moral dissent has been vital to moral progress on a whole range of issues — the Civil Rights Movement is just one example. Now, one important thing that’s closely related to this is that suppressing speech insulates the powerful from criticism and contestation.

ALT And powerful people like being protected from dissent, criticism, and contestation. They like holding unaccountable power. This means that wherever the appropriate limits of free speech are, and wherever the legal lines are drawn, those who hold power have incentives to try to push those boundaries, to try to expand what falls within, and is classified as falling within, whatever exceptions we draw for free speech. We should always expect political leaders to push for censorship and repression that’s impermissible. Our task as liberals is to push back against political leaders when they do this. And what I want to argue here is that there’s plenty for us to push back on in the United States today, despite the important protections offered by our First Amendment.