Blaming violence on free speech is a very old trick

In the wake of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, the Trump administration is following an old script. It argues that political speech causes political violence, and that this speech must therefore be punished.

It is imperative that all defenders of free speech — whether on the left, right or in the center — reject this narrative from the outset. For more than a century, the American understanding of free speech has been that political expression may only be punished when it incites imminent violence, such as whipping up a crowd of angry people until they riot.

This principle of free speech, which traces back to Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes and the famous “clear and present danger” test, is designed to protect political beliefs, however wrong or dangerous they may be, by separa