Letter/Communication
Our First Amendment tradition focuses too much on speech. Response to: The Right to Be Hostile - Alex Gourevitch.
Boston Review
22 Jul 2025
Abstract
Alex Gourevitch pushes back on the three principal justifications for cracking down on pro-Palestinian, anti-genocide protests. He argues forcefully—and rightly, in my view—that the costs of permitting those protests is greatly exaggerated. I could not agree more with his call for a more developed defense of the right to protest as we resist the new McCarthyism. But in defense of both recent protests and our right to protest more broadly, we need to say more.
To explain the scope and limits of the right to protest—on college campuses and in the public square more broadly—we need an account of the affirmative value of assembly, including its disruptive forms. We need to explain why protest should be permitted, even when it is discomforting and disruptive, by explaining why protest is such an important good. That is what we do with freedom of speech. We protect speech despite its many harms, from misinformation and disinformation to hate speech and revenge porn. And we do so because we have a rich understanding of the values it serves—facilitating the search for truth, fostering democracy, enabling individual autonomy. We need a similar rich account of the values of assembly and protest.
Metrics
1 Record Views
Details
- Title
- Our First Amendment tradition focuses too much on speech. Response to: The Right to Be Hostile - Alex Gourevitch.
- Creators
- Tabatha A Abu El-Haj - Drexel University, Thomas R. Kline School of Law
- Publication Details
- Boston Review
- Resource Type
- Letter/Communication
- Academic Unit
- Thomas R. Kline School of Law
- Other Identifier
- 991022199150804721