Posted on 09/24/2017 6:02:13 PM PDT by KevinB
I've seen so many threads in which it is incorrectly said that the players have a right of free speech that I thought someone should explain what the right of free speech actually is. (I am an attorney.)
Here is the text of the First Amendment to the US Constitution:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." (Emphasis added.)
As the text makes clear, the Constitutional right of free speech only applies to government action. In private enterprise, there is no right to free speech. A private employer can absolutely fire someone for saying things the employer doesn't like whether those things are said during or outside of working hours. There is no right of free speech other than that stated in the First Amendment and that is limited to acts of the government.
NFL teams hire players to put as many rear ends in seats and eyeballs on screens as absolutely possible. If those players are out there antagonizing half the customers, that player is not doing what he was hired to do. Unless the player has a contract granting that right, the employer is free to terminate the player for engaging in those activities. There is no Constitutional protection for engaging in those activities in a private employer-employee relationship.
Wear a Pepsi shirt while delivering Coke products and see how long you have a job.
Why yes, yes they do have the right of free speech.
Next.
Free speech does not mean consequence-free speech.
You titled your vanity very poorly.
The problem is the owners are afraid to not look Progressive by punishing the players for this nonsense. So they hide behind free speech
How so?
Or write negative comments about your job, boss, and coworkers on Facebook.
It’s neither here, nor there, as to whether they’re allowed “free speech”, however, it only means the government can’t do anything about it.
It DOESN’T mean that we, the people, can’t totally reject the NFL, and never buy another ticket, or a sponsor’s product.
THAT will nullify their “free speech rights” a lot faster than the Government...and they’ll be too broke to fight it.
Thanks for that Kevin, the First Amendment restrains the Government and it's agents, not private individuals.
Absolutely not. That’s why this guy was fined for taking a knee -
http://nypost.com/2017/09/24/odell-beckham-penalized-for-peeing/
“Unless the player has a contract granting that right...”
I have to think there’s some contractual impediment to punishing the players.
Also, obviously, top talent cannot be replaced without affecting team play.
So the players are just going to have to grow up. Not easy for spoiled athletes to do.
I wish the media had a Monty Pythonesque character who would stop memes whn they get “too silly”.
Regardless of whether or not it's Constitutional, I believe we need to expand first amendment rights with regard to what people say outside of working hours.
So long as a person doesn't claim to be speaking as a representative of his company, and so long as the speech is protected (i.e. does not incite violence, etc.) then an individual should not have to worry about losing his/her job because of statements made outside work.
We are entering a time where companies are making claims over the entire lives of their employees. They are requiring their employees to behave in certain ways and abstain from certain activities supposedly because of health concerns. They are scouring employees' social media to see if those employees share the same worldview and the company purports to hold in their mission statements.
This frankly is Orwellian even if it is not being done by the government.
Saying that employees can go get a job elsewhere or go work for themselves if they want to speak their minds is no answer. The leftists that gained control of the academies and media decades ago now have control over the corporate boards and offices. There will soon be no place for conservatives to work if we dare speak our minds outside of work.
I think what you meant to say is that employers can impose consequences on employee speech without violating the First Amendment.
Even some on the right don't get it.
But what's worse is the intentional obfuscation from the left.
They arrantly lie about the meaning of the First Amendment to advance their anti-liberty agenda. That's what we're seeing right now in the NFL anthem debate. It's frustrating to read their brazen lies about the First Amendment but it's heartening to see that the vast majority of NFL fans aren't buying it.
No, I said what I meant to say. There is no right to free speech in a private setting.
"I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to Odell Beckham Jr. -- for giving us a TD celebration that's very fitting for a team owned by two men who have no problem with players throwing a temper tantrum while the national anthem is played before NFL games."
LMAO.
That's not what the title of the thread conveys. The title of the thread suggests that NFL players don't have Free Speech rights. That's why I said you titled the thread poorly.
No, they don't.
The First Amendment is strictly about Congress, not individual citizens. It proscribes CONGRESS from abridging speech.
Why is this so hard to understand?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.