The First Amendment ensures speech, not paychecks. From TV hosts to pastors, free expression at work often collides with financial realities.
The first amendment protects our free speech but employers will protect their bottom line.
However, to some extent, there are some limitations and barriers for all of us. When he began his career, national radio personality Howard Stern couldn’t keep a job. His content was so raw and shocking that station owners and managers couldn’t afford to keep him on because advertisers couldn’t afford to risk supporting him. Things changed. He eventually became acceptable to enough listeners that he was hugely profitable. A massive contract with Sirius XM radio gave him a huge audience, allowed him to say whatever he wanted and paid him handsomely. Since 2004, they have paid him hundreds of millions of dollars. His employer found him to be profitable and accepted by many.
Stearns’ contract recently expired and his deal hasn’t been renewed. The renewal won’t be based on Stearns’ freedom of speech but it will be based on whether he will be profitable for Sirius XM radio which means he probably won’t be returning.
Glenn Mollette
Jimmy Kimmel is off the air, for now. He has been making a nice $15M a year salary from the Disney corporation who owns ABC and the ESPN network as well. He has had a nice job with them for 20 years and come out five nights a week saying whatever he wanted to say. After some recent comments made about Charlie Kirk that have been replayed numerous times on national TV, Disney decided to take his show down for a while, possibly forever.
Stations across the country let it be known to Disney they weren’t going to air Kimmel’s show after his remarks about Kirk and Disney listened. It was about money. Disney is in the business to make money, big money. The Stephen Colbert show was losing $40M a year and Colbert’s show had better ratings than Kimmel. The idea of losing millions of dollars on Kimmel was unacceptable to Disney. If TV station chains, cable companies and local stations around the country had applauded Kimmel, if ratings and profitability had soared, Disney would have kept Kimmel on.
No employer is going to keep you on the payroll if your mouth is bankrupting the business. You may have the right to speak but you may be speaking on the street corner somewhere without a paycheck if the employer doesn’t like what you are saying.
The minister of your local church may have the freedom to preach the Bible. Yet, he or she could find themselves unemployed if they ruffle enough feathers of the congregation’s leadership. A politician may speak freely but only has a job if he or she can sway enough voters. You can walk into wherever you work and say whatever you want about the company or your boss. Most likely, you’ll end up in the unemployment line. Plus, you will not be able to obtain a reference or recommendation for your next interview.
Yes, we have freedom of speech but it has limitations and consequences. Charlie Kirk was his own employer. That seems to be about the only way you can really pull off free speech. He said just about whatever he wanted and there wasn’t anyone to fire him, so someone killed him. Sadly, Charlie Kirk’s free speech cost him his life.
There is almost always a price to be paid for freedom of speech. It is important and it is American, but your employer doesn’t have to agree with you or keep you on the payroll.
About the author ~
Glen Mollett is the author of 13 books including Uncommom Sense, the Spiritual Chocolate series, Grandpa's Store, Minister's Guidebook insights from a fellow minister. His column is published weekly in over 600 publications in all 50 states.
The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily representative of any other group or organization. We welcome comments and views from our readers. Submit your letters to the editor or commentary on a current event 24/7 to editor@oursentinel.com.
Charlie Kirk assassination legacy, history of assassinated American leaders, free speech and violence in America, political debate versus violence, legacy of voices after tragedy
Florida’s education commissioner seeks to revoke a teacher’s license over a social media post about Charlie Kirk’s death, citing gross immorality.
TALLAHASSEE, FL - Education Commissioner Anastasios Kamoutsas has found probable cause that a Clay County teacher displayed “gross immorality” in posting about Charlie Kirk’s death, he announced Monday as Attorney General James Uthmeier launched a tip line to report “violent extremism.”
The teacher, left nameless by Kamoutsas, could lose her teaching license after she posted to social media, “This may not be the obituary. [sic] We were all hoping to wake up to, but this is a close second for me,” News 4 Jax reported. Kamoutsas said the post included an article about Kirk’s assassination, which occurred at a college in Utah.
Photo: Anthony Roberts/Unsplash
In keeping with his promise two weeks ago to investigate teachers making “despicable comments” about Kirk’s death, Kamoutsas said he found probable cause on four Education Code violations. Either the teacher can forfeit her license, or she can be tried in front of department’s Education Practices Commission or the Department of Administrative Hearings.
The commissioner is seeking the revocation of the teacher’s license.
“As these posts continue to circulate, more and more students are exposed to the dangerous and false idea that violence is an acceptable response to differing beliefs, an idea that has no place and will have no place here in Florida schools,” Kamoutsas said.
The four standards Kamoutsas alleges the teacher breached are gross immorality, failure to protect the health, safety and welfare of students, reduced effectiveness as an educator, and failing to distinguish her personal views from the school’s.
“Holding educators accountable for speech that celebrates violence in schools is not a violation of free speech, it is a necessary step to uphold the standards of the teaching profession and the safety of our schools,” Kamoutsas said.
Last week, Florida Education Association President Andrew Spar told the Phoenix that the commissioner’s letter to superintendents vowing investigations sends a “chilling effect throughout the profession.”
“For the commissioner to say there’s no longer a second-chance mentality in education and that he’s going to personally investigate and essentially be the investigator, the prosecutor, and the judge and jury in all of these cases is quite concerning,” Spar said.
New portal for complaints
On a broader scope, Uthmeier’s office opened the “Combatting Violent Extremism Portal” “where people will be able to report anything they observe or hear that is a call for violence or a threat for violence against other individuals,” he said.
“Let me be clear, we respect the First Amendment more than anybody. We’re not going to be the cancel culture that we’ve seen from so long from the Left. We’re not going to believe in silencing individuals. But there’s a big difference when it comes to a threat of violence, a call for violence. That is not protected by the First Amendment,” Uthmeier said.
Since Kirk’s death, people nationwide have lost jobs for speaking about Kirk’s death in a manner their employer views as disfavored, such as late night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel.
Teachers are held to higher standards than many other professions, the state officials said.
“It’s never been more important for people to speak up, for us to have safe academic environments where people feel confident to engage in discussion, free from attack, free from violence,” Uthmeier said.
The portal, not exclusive to education settings, allows people to submit screenshots, videos, or other evidence of threatened violence to Uthmeier’s office, anonymously if they want to.
“We must protect before people are shot, before explosives go off,” Uthmeier said.
Warning against abusing the portal, Uthmeier said, “We’re going to take everything seriously and, if you abuse this, if you provide something in a dishonest fashion to law enforcement, we’ll hold you accountable as well.”
The campaign in-part mimics the Office of Parental Rights Uthmeier added to his office earlier this year to field complaints alleging violation of parental-rights laws.
“The First Amendment does not protect speech that is likely and intended to provoke immediate acts of violence, or speech that expresses a serious intent to commit a specific act of violence, but it does protect robust free expression, which includes criticism of the past words and actions of prominent public figures,” the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida said in an online statement last week following the state’s announcement it would investigate teachers.
“Dissent, disagreement, and counterspeech that criticizes political views should not be confused with condoning or encouraging violence,” the ACLU said, and retaliation for such speech “feeds hostility and division.”
After Kirk was killed, the ACLU continued, “Most people likely encountered speech they found despicable no matter where they fall on the political spectrum — that is the nature of a democracy where free speech is protected. While calling for further violence or condoning what happened to Charlie Kirk is wrong, many of the posts being cited for retaliation constitute core protected speech.”
Florida Phoenix is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Michael Moline for questions: info@floridaphoenix.com.
Florida teacher license revocation case, Charlie Kirk death social media reaction, Florida extremism reporting portal, free speech in Florida schools, ACLU response to Florida teacher discipline
The League of Women Voters of Illinois meets with lawmakers on Lobby Day to address key social and environmental issues.
Photo courtesy League of Women Voters of Illinois
League of Women Voters of Illinois members gather in Springfield for their annual Lobby Day on Wednesday. Experienced League members and members of the new Volunteer Lobby Corps met face-to-face with state legislators.
SPRINGFIELD - The League of Women Voters of Illinois (LWVIL) returned to the Illinois State Capitol on Wednesday, May 8, for its annual Lobby Day, engaging with lawmakers across the political spectrum to advocate for a range of policy issues.
This year’s event marked the debut of the organization’s newly established Volunteer Lobby Corps, a group of trained advocates who joined experienced League members in meeting face-to-face with legislators. Prior to their Capitol meetings, the volunteers underwent orientation led by seasoned members to prepare for discussions with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.
The League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan group, bases its advocacy on positions it has thoroughly studied and reached consensus on. According to LWVIL President Becky Simon, the group continues to press for voting rights protections and initiatives aimed at building a more equitable democratic system.
“LWVIL advocates to protect voting rights and advance a more equitable democracy,” Simon stated. “The League stands up for social justice issues because systemic inequities prohibit people from participating equally in our democracy.”
This year’s lobbying priorities included the defense of Constitutional rights and efforts to ensure equity in both education and housing. Local chapters of the League were also encouraged to raise district-specific issues with their representatives. These included managing environmental waste and safeguarding aquifers from potential contaminants.
The organization’s Capitol visit is part of a broader effort to maintain a visible presence in public policy discussions and to empower volunteers to take active roles in civic engagement.
"The idea that the U.S. government is absolutely flouting our constitutional right to due process is terrifying, ..."
by Judith Ruiz-Branch Illinois News Connection
CHICAGO - An Illinois law professor is weighing in on what she called a "very public and open test of due process" for immigrants being deported from the United States without court hearings.
On Wednesday, a U.S. district judge denied the Justice Department's request to further delay the wrongful deportation case of a Maryland man, Kilmar Obrego Garcia, who was sent to a prison in El Salvador. Both a U.S. District Court and the U.S. Supreme Court have ordered the Trump administration to "facilitate" his return.
Victoria Carmona, clinical professor of immigration law, Chicago-Kent College of Law, said regardless of citizenship status, the lack of due process for one person is a crisis for everyone.
"The idea that the U.S. government is absolutely flouting our constitutional right to due process is terrifying, because if they're going to do it for one person, this is the test case," Carmona explained. "This is to see what can the government get away with and start pushing the odometer further and further away from due process. And it should be scary to everyone."
The government now has until May 5 to report any efforts it is making to comply with the court orders. In the meantime, Gov. JB Pritzker said Illinois is looking into ways to cut any state financial ties to Salvadoran companies in protest of that government's imprisonment of hundreds of deportees taken from the U.S. without court hearings.
Obrego Garcia already had a set of protections which said he could not return to his native country of El Salvador for fear of government persecution. The Justice Department said deporting him was an administrative error, although the Trump administration insists he is affiliated with a gang.
Carmona pointed out both countries' leaders are making the case more difficult to resolve.
"From El Salvador's perspective, I'm sure they're upset because their citizen had essentially claimed protections and saying that the El Salvadoran government would harm him if he returned," Carmona observed. "But this idea that the U.S. has no position to facilitate his return is an absolute lie."
Whatever happens to Obrego Garcia, Carmona added the unprecedented nature of the executive branch ignoring judicial orders has set the U.S. up for a constitutional crisis.
"At this point, I think Congress should be looking at impeachment," Carmona contended. "If Trump is going to clearly violate the Supreme Court orders, the resolution is impeachment."
An astonishing number of Trump supporters took the dangling video bait and swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.
After last weekend's Hands Off! protests across the country, TikTok creator @redsaidblue posted a satirical video, sprinkled with subtle digs at popular MAGA stereotypes, in which she claimed to be attending the protest as a paid participant. In the video, she described what she could and couldn’t wear, who her point of contact was, and that she would receive a bonus for bringing a sign.
"I got paid $100 for going to the protest, and I got an extra $10 for bringing the sign," she confesses to viewers in character as a Trump supporter going over to the other side to make a few bucks. "Overall, it was a pretty good experience. The people were pretty nice."
A MAGA supporter on X (formerly Twitter) with over 200,000 followers, "@TheEXECUTlONER_", posted the performance to his account and encouraged other Trump supporters to share it. The buffoonery sailed by unchecked by rational thought or rudimentary critical thinking.
There were 1,400 Hands Off! demonstrations across the country on Saturday. The majority drew well over 1,000 participants. Conservatively, someone or some entity would have spent around $140 million (before signs). The kicker: an estimated 3 million people took part in the nationwide protests. If all the marchers were punching the proverbial clock, someone would have spent $300 million—which might have been a boon to the economy after the stock market experienced its steepest plunge since COVID, during Trump’s first term.
While @redsaidblue wasn’t actually paid to protest—it's not clear if she even attended one—the blue-check MAGA user is making bank. As of this story, the video had been shared by 24,000 other accounts on the social media platform. While the young woman wasn’t actually paid for the protest, the account that posted her video is cleaning up, having collected 47,000 likes and over 3,000 comments so far.
Meanwhile, the creator began receiving negative backlash from liberals for posting the video, which she eventually took down. She is now attempting to remove copies from the internet. Supporters from the left were enraged, claiming her video added fuel to the political fire by implying extreme right conservatives aren’t smart enough to recognize when they’re being punked.
It appears her critics were right. The video—or screenshots with text excerpts from it—is circulating on conservative social media channels as supposed proof that liberal protesters are social justice mercenaries, reinforcing the narrative that liberals only protest against the Trump administration because they are paid.
Redsaidblue posted a follow-up video to her TikTok account yesterday, apologizing to fellow liberals for harming their movement.
"I truly thought it was so obvious that it was a joke. I thought that if anyone did take it seriously, if they shared it with someone else, the next person would be like, "Bro, that's satire".
Do paid protesters actually exist? They don't, according to an article from USA Today.
"Time after time, claims of "paid protesters" have been debunked, sometimes by the very people who made them in the first place," according to an article by John R. Roby.
Leo Gertner wrote a piece for The Washington Post entitled, "So what if protesters are paid?"
Gertner wrote, "So the next time someone tries to discredit a movement by insinuating that some of the people on the ground are being compensated, ask the all-important question: So what?"
What's the old saying? Freedom isn't free.
By Michael Dilley, Guest Commentator
The Zone gym was forcefully closed yesterday by the Champaign County Sheriffs Office in conjunction with State's Attorney Julia Reitz and Judge Tom Difanis. Like many other shuttered businesses in the State of Illinois, the Zone and it’s employees are suffering tremendous set backs and loosing their livelihoods, and it just continues.
As with many other in Illinois, the Zone believes their Constitutional rights have been violated and chose to exercise what they believed to be their right. They did it properly with precautions and notified their members. They pursued legal council and duly informed the proper organizations ahead of time. May I remind one that this is America, with founding documents protecting our freedom and rights. Those who detract from that fact may find themselves needing it someday. To allow this to occur without opposition is the first step in losing these very important rights, no matter what your opinion might be on what the Zone did. Just ask our Jewish friends or those in Communist China how this ends. Just because an autocratic politician declares something, does not make it correct. In the words of Sir John Dalberg-Acton, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
In an order released by Judge Difanis, he stated "The Zone is significantly endangering the public health and welfare of people". This is a false narrative and not based in any data or science out of St. Joseph. They told us that this shutdown was to the flatten the curve. St. Joseph has not only flattened the curve, we have never had one. This is not Chicago, this is St. Joseph, you cannot use the same one size fits all for the entire state. This is an arbitrary and capricious application of these standards.
There is so much wrong about this it’s hard to know where to start. One has to wonder how it is permissible to allow weed sale businesses and liquor stores to be allowed to stay open, call them “essential” and maintain it is for health reasons, but a small gym with a few members are not. Has anyone seen the line of people standing next to each other outside the weed store?
How is it that places like Wal-Mart and numerous other big box stores can stay open, but little mom and pop stores like those in St. Joseph with 4-5 customers at a time that sell the same items cannot. Something wrong with this logic. When things like this don’t add up one has to wonder what else is going on here?
This all is a demonstration in how our Governor and some other public officials are out of touch with the common man. It shows the Governor has little to no understanding about how things operate outside of Cook County. He makes dictative decrees without allowing the Legislative representatives in areas outside of Cook County to participate. He makes other out of touch politicians, like the Mayor of Chicago, his confidants. He violates Illinois law and the Constitution and scoffs at and attacks those who call him out on these injustices. It is politicians like him that the framers of the Constitution envisioned when they developed that great document.
Then we have some of our local officials and politicians choosing to follow the Governor along in his blatant disregard of our Constitutional rights like little puppy dogs.
There is something not right about all this. It is my hope that in the end there will be a big debate about how wrong this has been and how we never again need to so easily give up our God given rights.
About Michael Dilley:
Michael has been a resident of Champaign County for well over 60 years. He has had a 40 plus year career locally in Public Safety, holding numerous positions in Public Safety Organizations. He has taught and trained many others throughout the Public Safety community. He has volunteered and coached youth athletics in the local community and has volunteered in his church.
He is a big believer in the United States Constitution and it’s importance to our communities.
by Glenn Mollette, Guest Commentator
