LET US HEAR FROM YOU!
We welcome letters to the editor on issues presented in the magazine. Email letters to wabarnews@wsba.org. All opinions, statements, and conclusions expressed in letters to the editor represent the views of the respective authors and do not necessarily carry the endorsement of the WSBA or its Board of Governors. Publication of letters to the editor is not to be deemed an endorsement of the opinions, statements, and conclusions expressed by the author(s).
Free Speech a Birthright
I commend Hunter M. Abell, our new WSBA president, for his innovative adaptation of the Norman Rockwell painting entitled “Freedom of Speech” (Bar News, October 2023). Friends, clients, and a family member who have inspired Mr. Abell are deftly inserted into the Rockwell painting as it appears on the cover of the Bar News.
President Abell requests input into what the Bar can do to inspire more trust and confidence in the bench and the legal profession. The answer is in the painting. The Bar should take an unwavering position in favor of free speech and the free flow of ideas.
As George Washington once stated, “If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the slaughter.” We are dangerously close to Washington’s dire scenario today. Consider the censorship attempts that are presently afoot: fact checking that leads to canceling and de-platforming people and ideas, heckling and cancellation of speakers on college campuses, attempts to criminalize certain topics as “hate speech,” online shadow banning and filing defamation lawsuits to silence one’s opponents.
There are some things to consider about these modes of censorship. Fact checking does not occur in a vacuum. Fact checkers have a point of view and are often inclined to label an idea as “misinformation” or “disinformation” if they disagree with it. Fact checking is so widespread that even the common citizen is being de-platformed online today. Heckling and cancellation of speakers on college campuses often occurs when the speaker dissents from prevailing orthodoxies. Attempts to criminalize certain topics as “hate speech” prevent debate and discussion of controversial historical events. Online shadow banning of targeted books and articles obscures internet access to controversial topics such as COVID-19.
Freedom of speech is not for the timid. Freedom of speech includes freedom for those ideas one despises and for statements that may offend others.
Freedom of speech is the birthright of a free people. In a democracy all voices and ideas must be heard in order to ferret out the good ideas from the bad. Only then does society improve and only then are “we the people” in charge. Also, free speech gives people the opportunity to correct mistakes and injustices of the government. Without free speech democracies slide into totalitarianism. With it they can thrive.
Patricia Michl, Ellensburg
Letters to the editor published in Bar News must respond to content presented in the magazine and also comply with Washington General Rule 12.2 and Keller v. State Bar of California, 496 U.S. 1 (1990).* Bar News may limit the number of letters published based on available space in a particular issue and, if many letters are received in response to a specific piece in the magazine, may select letters that provide differing viewpoints to publish. Bar News does not publish anonymous letters or more than one letter from the same contributor per issue. All letters are subject to editing for length, clarity, civility, and grammatical accuracy.
*GR 12.2(c) states that the WSBA is not authorized to “(1) Take positions on issues concerning the politics or social positions of foreign nations; (2) Take positions on political or social issues which do not relate to or affect the practice of law or the administration of justice; or (3) Support or oppose, in an election, candidates for public office.” In Keller v. State Bar of California, the Court ruled that a bar association may not use mandatory member fees to support political or ideological activities that are not reasonably related to the regulation of the legal profession or improving the quality of legal services.