From George F. Will Archive:
End Run on Free Speech: For several decades, most of the ingenuity that liberal academics have invested in First Amendment analysis has aimed to justify limiting the core activity that the amendment was written to protect — political speech. These analyses treat free speech as not an inherent good but as a merely instrumental good, something justified by serving other ends — therefore something to be balanced against, and abridged to advance, other goods.
**Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech.**
I’d say those words are fairly unambiguous. How is it that Congress is continually trying to do exactly that which it is prohibited from doing? How is it that they get away with it?