Speaking for a Living and the First Amendment 

“It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong.” Thomas Sowell

IJ doing good work. Look across the pond at UK and people are getting arrested for Tweeting...

America is a republic!

Thank heavens for you guys! ❤🙏 Thank God for Tim Berners-Lee

I feel bad that I miss the days when Lawyers and Pharmaceuticals were not allowed to advertise on TV. But not that bad.

Thanks for all the work IJ does! And I mean this as nicely as possible, but I think someone needs to get Mr. Sherman a glass of water. It was present the entire video, but I had to stop at around the 24 minute mark because the sound of dry mouth was all I could hear.

0:08 Constitutional REPUBLIC 😮

thank you

Hello everyone

The little green pop-up boxes are helpful, much appreciated. Thank you IJ for all you do ❤ 🌳 ❤

Love the work IJ does! If i could have my pick of any place to work as an attorney after I finish undergrad/ law school, it would be there!

Thank you for you work.

It prohibits the government from criminalizing individuals for ANY kind of speech, that being said there's absolutely a discussion to be had about holding people accountable for libel and defamation

This country’s Federal government is so far from adhering to the Federal Constitution that you’ll never get it back to a Constitutional Republic but I appreciate the Institute for Justice for Trying !

We need some laws requiring Bar Associations to discipline lawyers in public office who violate legal ethics, such as forcing ordinary citizens to litigate for their rights even though they knew they were likely to lose or have a pattern of losing in court on other lawsuits preventing citizens from exercising their rights. We see lawyers, all in public positions such as judges, prosecuting attorneys, governors, and legislators, as well as political appointees violating legal ethics every day. For example, my understanding is that it violates legal ethics to make a campaign promise to prosecute particular people when running for District Attorney, yet nothing happens to them! We need to require attorneys and ordinary citizens, such as people who spent a fortune winning a case against officials, to constituents all Bar Associations. It makes a mockery of democracy when public officials are allowed to violate legal ethics and/or established rights in their elected or appointed duties. I hope in the future you will go after the corrupt Bar Associations who fail to discipline members who violate legal ethics in their daily duties, causing citizens undue distress. No one should have to sue to get FOIA documents (except for documents that must be redacted by law) or sue for to speak at a school board meeting.

This reminds me of Marc Steven's script for traffic court.

I'm a consumer, and you're totally right that opening up professional speech would benefit people like me. I really wish I could get a good source of purely speech-based medical advice. Doctors are always trying to do the conduct part of practicing medicine, and there's nothing wrong with that, but I currently have some questions I need answered by an expert and I don't want someone adjusting my medications because they misheard my description of a symptom.

After waching the Q&A section at the end I immediate purchased the book Rise of the Warrior Cop on Audible. I just started it and enjoying it so far!

I'm about 75k into defending myself now after publishing court records of a well known person.

How do the courts deal with a massive influx of AI Lawsuits? With AI of their own, like Florida did with sentencing recommendations, what could possibly go wrong!

Having to become a private instructor just to help someone get what is owed to them Is to me just a different path for civil rights Forfeiture Especially if the $$$ is used for pension

When you tell a psychiatrist "I'm not suicidal" what they hear is "I'm suicidal." It's a power thing, makes them go deaf.

Two types we don’t need is lobbyists and influencers

I donate to IJ and love what they do. But please get that dude a different mic. It's hard to listen while he sounds like he got food in his mouth😅

I think people that "report news" should be licensed. Then they could empathize with people abused by licensing schemes.

If you're asking that question in regards to the American constitution . Yes it does .

❤️GBU🙏TEAM❤️

@33:13 I love this idea of wrong house insurance.

The issue isn't "occupational" licensing, the issue is, IF you are doing business you need to have a LICENSE! 😁🥸😱🤪👍👍🇺🇸

Speech is "free" until you attempt to monetize it. Then there are all kinds of limits, rules, and protections that apply -- that's the part people like "influencers" (e.g., unemployed people with social media) too often forget.

I need help with one city in Florida, that it’s in violation of the Florida and Federal Constitution!! I try to get heal from Local Police and Estate Attorney!!! They don’t want to do something about it!! If you can send me email to send the information!! The refused to provide public records!!

If the 1st fails, it's time for the 2nd.

"Influencers"? Why is it that one side always accuses the other of "influencing," but they themselves are never guilty?

the fact that you have to even ask the question is telling of our times. yes the only thing i cant say is compelling violence and threats.

Ya'll need to do a show on the reqiurements to create laws that are declaratorial and constitutional, and then how when "bad" laws are created how we can challenge and alter and/or abolish them! WE the PEOPLE want a system where WE can nip the bad crap in the bud! 🥸😁🤪👍👍🇺🇸

books are regulated though in the same way that media is, can't say no-no words

“Legal entitlement to access [lifesaving therapy]” yep sounds like a free county

Law books are only in the library and I cannot check them out because I do not have a law license.

Nice job Kim. If you're part of a government entity, I'd be worried. The brain power of these people can actually save the United States as a free country. I as an individual I support and standby their principles.

Could IJ please give input on the UK's recent threats to extradite people over their speech?

It sounds like the private eye lobby has strong game in some of these juridictions. And they are pals with attorney lobby, otherwise they'd be an option to "help" citizens file their claim Tour guide license is like taxi cab medallion. Limits supply, protects the rates, and the coalition of proper tour guidance will offer gratitude to the officals who make sure only good tours are given, protecting the city and the tourists.

This is against a disabled person and her property

Imfluencers are no different from commenrators. If a comedian, news analyst, or blogger can say whatever without some extra layer of regulation, why not an influencer? When you have a direct relationship with someone, like a lawyer or investment consultant, or teacher... yes there needs to be something to protects the client from manipulation.

It would be good to learn somebody will address the sensor shib (silly sp. necessary) on youtube and all other public platforms. It goes to the heart of addressing, or suppressing, our right to expression. How dare they stifle public conversation? Supreme Court ruled we don't have the right to not be offended. Abuse can be addressed as a separate issue, and there are laws in place to prosecute that.

The US Constitution does indeed "protect" our rights, it does not "grant" our rights. As the Declaration of Independence puts it, we are "endowed" by our "Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

The difference between speech and action is only a legal fiction unless it clearly distinguished between intending to cause an effect and merely causing it.

What is the difference between a Nighttime News Anchors and an Online Influencers? What is the difference between Legacy Media and Alternative Media? Between the groups, which are more truthful and trustworthy? Is there a difference? Can either side be trusted more? And what are the risks in believing one side over the other? Which of the two are more credible, honest, and informative? Which tend to be more unbiased, un-politically motivated, and tackle real issues on either side more openly, fairly and equally without overt critical judgement, prejudice, partiality?

Tell RU-vid to stop the Censorship

As a person with a PhD from a well-known engineering school, I like to examine the borderline here. I don't call myself an 'engineer' in this context because I'm not licensed to offer engineering services to the public. In a long career, I've always worked under the 'industrial exemption' that allows business to employ non-licensed people to perform in-house design work as long as their services are not offered to the public. In one interstate move a long time ago, I decided that getting relicensed simply wasn't worth the hassle. With that caveat, I'm an engineer. I'd contend that there's a compelling government interest in requiring a license to sign off on plans where the public safety - not just the safety of a sophisticated client - is involved. Steam boilers explode, planes crash, bridges fall, trains derail, buildings collapse, power lines electrocute, furnaces set fire to the building, unless they are competently designed and built. I don't work directly in that space - my designs are produced by the request of a sophisticated employer and will see much more evaluation and testing before a PE signs off. I don't want to be that guy. I want to build stuff, not spend all my time in meetings and reviews and bureaucracy. Yes, you need an engineering license to sign off on the installation of traffic control devices on the public highway. But the case that IJ assisted with in 2017 (Mats Järlström v Oregon State Board of Examiners) was a clear First Amendment violation. Järlström was pointing out in public that the timing of caution lights was altered in an unsafe manner with the installation of traffic cameras. Calling the public's attention to the hazard is NOT signing off on the safety of the design; he was speaking as an informed citizen who was able to apply engineering knowledge. His speech was suppressed because the claim was raised that he was practicing engineering without a license. Thanks to IJ, it was thrown out of court. I still am careful about referring to myself as an 'engineer' because I practice in a different State and a different Circuit. There are several social media platforms on which I list my occupation as 'enginerd' - a portmanteau word that virtually all the readers understand, but one that would be hard to construe as claiming to be that which I am not - a registered PE.

The purpose of any organisation be it governments or corporations is to protect itself from competition and enlarge itself and it’s sphere of influence and power . Increasing legislation and regulation is one way of protecting itself from competition and at the same time increasing its own power by limiting the growth of competition.

No more or less then anyone else. So I mean yeah since they're just faces that speak.

32:40 The reason the government is willing to spend more than it cost to settle a case is they are looking long term. Yes, a 100k settlement is less than spending say 200k to litigate, but they are looking to the next time or the next 10 times something like this happens. Over time this could end or costing taxpayers vastly more. Even if they loose they figure it may dissuade enough other cases, especially unjustified cases looking to cash in on the precedence, to reduce the cost to taxpayers.

One small point: most prescription-only medications aren't also controlled substances. For example, estradiol is prescription-only but isn't schedule 3 the way testosterone is.

How does the first Amendment in the US interact with safeguards against fraud and defamation? For example fraudulent nutritional advise.

McKenzie friend

Hello, Institute for Justice. Can i please use some footage on my channel. I love what you do and know I can bring many viewers and donors your way. Your work is so important.. the civil rights lawyer got me here and I'm going nowhere.. Thank you all the same. This needs to be seen.

licensure inevitably leads to overpriced, gilded, lazy mage towers full of preening lords burning every ladder in the land to ensure their fiefdom can never be burdened by change or competition

@26:10 translation: i hope they dont let lay-persons figure out how to make us irrelevent.

I think you needed to touch on the litigation surrounding the Florida Stop WOKE Act and the Stop wrongs to our kids act. Some parts of this were ruled against wit a permanent injunction by judge Walker. This is squarely where conduct and speech meet, and the most media popular cases of our time .

@Institute for Justice WE👏ARE👏A👏REPUBLIC👏 (please stop calling us a democracy!)

I will say again I'm on SS and I now donate on a Monthly Bases.. Also I started years ago, starting my statements with, "In My Opinion"..🤔

Never trust anyone who says democracy.

We live in a time of growing tyranny. There is just free speech, not types of free speech. But one of the greatest threats to free speech is corporate tyranny like that practiced by Google and Facebook and their constant censoring. But whether corporate or government, the effects of tyranny on your rights and lives are the same.

Cool shirt

Practicing law in a courtroom when representing yourself is Free Speech however you cannot represent your spouse, we are the only country this exists

We do not have a democracy, not even a constitutional democracy. We have a republic and there is a huge difference.

Good afternoon, looking at the fact that the Russian language was dominant in Ukraine for many decades, today the Russian language is the occupation language in Ukraine, is this an open question in international society?Thank you very much.

Yes, unless they promote hate

"Freedom of speech...sets America appart from other constitutional democracies." There are MANY countries with constitutional freedom of speech.

My problem is when people are giving psychological advice. I think that really is something that should come from the educated individual not just some schmuck with a copy of psychology for dummies.

It’s supposed to but not in Canada. Just ask Jordan.

Occupational Licensing is sometimes required though? I dont want a random person designing buildings for example. Even advice that is for medical - disclosure is absolutely vital otherwise you're just being irresponsible.

26:10 "Self-help is fraught with peril." In the same way a person can decide whose speech they want to listen to, they should be allowed to seek it from AI if they so choose. They should however be warned that self-help is fraught with peril.

You should consider turning down the gain on that microphone or adding a desser or something. I got 6 minutes in but I just can't listen to the ASMR soundtrack. I'm interested in this topic too.

We need to de-regulate and let tort claims keep people safe. Darwin has to eat too.

Is there a uk branch of the institute for justice?

One has a right to free speech, they do not have a right to every platform. My family owned an advertising paper, we had content restrictions, we were family friendly and would not take some adds. We had a right to keep content out of our paper that we found objectionable. Should a restaurant that has live music on Friday night have to let everyone use it just because they let one use it. I see many complain about private corporations restricting content. That is their right, Go make your own platform if you want to post somthing that they restrict. In order for rights to work they have to work for both parties.

15:25 thanks guy... way reenforce the idea that men violent. Ya couldnt say something neutral like a good lawyer.

Has IJ been fighting uncoatitutional licenseing regarding the 2nd? I do thank you for fighting the good fight (which IJ is doing all across the nation) But what about the 2nd?

You guys should work with Coffeezzilla. He's been going after scammer Logan Paul and Coffee's error's and omission's insurance scammed him so now it's making it nearly impossible to defend himself. Logan Paul has ripped off tons of people with his NFT "game" and Coffeezilla exposed him for doing it.

Thank you for your efforts for many. However, it is a great travesty that the court’s argued over trivial. It’s a bigger travesty we have lost our roots in Christianity. Most of the issues you talk about could be found in a very old book called the Bible.

i would really love to see a class action lawsuit of all the youtubers who are currently getting their 1st amendment rights stomped on..the biggest group under the whole umbrella would be the 2a community

We are NOT a constitutional democracy! WE ARE A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC! Please be aware of the difference.

Does the video ever actually talk about influences?

There is no First Amendment on RU-vid. This video is on the wrong platform.

What about regulating speech vs regulating the sale of said speech?

Licensing everything is the opposite of liberty.

Maybe I missed it or maybe the case is still pending. But what happened to the guy in California and Illinois who was helping make claims for people to retrieve their bank accounts that had been seized by the state. Is that still pending?

Too many tongue noises! I can't do it!

In the interest of Justice, The Law of The Land must be foundationally the strongest and most superfluous Code of Ethics which Governed the Redress and Counter Reactions presented and Fed Questions which guide and manage all the most Hostile and Unfriendly User Agent Dissenters known today and those playboys/girls area influence either are limited or liable, immune or privilege as it stands and where the cert or stats necessary require. Aka, where the mediums of the 2nd Amendment and the interpret of the 1st, the pushback and remand as due natural process and the next forward progress step for both parties under the Law. I believe permissibility and lack of oversight are not the same thing but ethics and moral and the legal efficacy of government agents and employee shouldn't be parsed or minimized under the law or there is only grey lines left

At 5:30, is there a distinction between particularized advice in a specific situation versus generic advice based on general criteria? Edit: maybe I should just keep listening before asking questions.

As always, I wanted to sincerely thank you for your videos, and the work you do. You are a beacon of light in an all to dark sea of injustice. I wanted to talk three brief topics and ask if you would explain your thoughts about the subjects. 1 AI generated Deepfakes specifically in regard to sexually explicit material utilizing someone likeness and the states that are already preemptively attempting to outlaw them, and whether artistic expression is covered under the First amendment. Personally, I don't view it any differently than if I was an exceptional artist capable of creating art undistinguishable from real life and then having the government attempt to dictate what I can & cannot draw, however according to Reddit my option is in the minority. Can you provide your view on the matter? Thank you. 2, Government utilizing Dark Practices, Hawaii's unclaimed property site lists the requirements to claim unclaimed property including direction on how to file out the required form but does not actually provide anyway of actually obtaining the required form. After months of attempting to contact their offices, and then attempting have them mail or Fax me a form, the only methods short of flying to Hawaii to obtain the form, by the time I received it I had already surpassed the allotted time, and my money was forfeited to the state. I know I have run across other examples throughout the years, but I currently can't remember any of them, are you aware of any other "Dark Practices" the government still tries to utilize to circumvent their obligations or requirements and what efforts are being made to combat such practices? 3. I am sure you are aware of the case regarding Amazons use of DOJ against Amy Nelson, and the subsequent civil forfeiture battle they just won (75% of) but I only just recently became aware of the situation and was absolutely dumbfounded by it. I have been aware of the ongoing battle against civil forfeitures for a number of years now, but this was the first I had heard of the particular case, I was horrified to learn how easy a large company was able to evoke such a bastardization of our laws against whomever they wished with complete impunity. If you have already covered their case, would you be willing to mention it again for other viewers as it apparently has now breached its 4th year of embattlement and I'm sure there are other similar to myself who probably never heard about what I strongly feel is one of the really important cases to is sure become a landmark in years to come. Bless you all once again, and the work you do

I hope it doesnt

It depends on whether the media company was acting as a government agent when they censored you. If they did, that's a violation of the 1st Amendment. If the government was not involved, it's private enterprise.

Like or hate… Alex Jones doesn’t have freedom of speech.

Fk" occupational speech" We should all have free speech. Social media must be liable for its content if it wants to cemsor speech

This woman is so arrogant in her tone and speech pattern.

Love the show but you guys gotta fix the audio. The mouth smacking noises are so loud and it becomes extremely distracting.

How can anything they say be trusted when the first statement is blatantly false? We are not a constitutional democracy we area constitutional republic an important and major distinction. I mean it's in the pledge of allegiance we should be learning in primary school. I pledge allegiance to the Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. It's not that hard.