Shut Up and Dribble...Please?

In 2018, Laura Ingraham caused an uproar across America after she lashed out at cultural and basketball icon LeBron James.  For the sake of brevity, I will spare you of the details, but if you care to find out more I've linked the original story where she told James to "shut up and dribble."  Most everyone has a stance on this issue one way or the other, but is either party truly in the wrong?

Lebron's Side

Lebron James, shown in uniform for the Los Angeles Lakers of the NBA

https://www.nba.com/news/lakers-surging-behind-lebron-james

In this particular instance, Lebron was under fire because he had touched on his own political opinions as well as his opinion on Donald Trump, who was president at the time, in an interview with ESPN.  All of this is perfectly fine in the eyes of the First Amendment.  He was simply speaking his mind, which is protected under the First Amendment.  He made no actions, or expressive actions.  All he did was talk about his own opinions, which is covered under the First Amendment.  Legally speaking, James did nothing wrong.  The outrage came in response to this because a good amount of the general public believes that LeBron shouldn't use his platform to spread political opinions when that isn't what he's paid to do.

Ingraham's Side

Ingraham at the 2016 RNC with Fox News

https://time.com/5223600/laura-ingraham-vacation/

Fox News' Laura Ingraham was a part of the crowd who believed that LeBron should keep his opinions to himself.  Her "shut up and dribble" comment was not well received, but she was within her rights to say it.  She is attempting to silence James, but because she isn't a part of the government it is fully legal in the scope of the First Amendment.

My Thoughts

While I am neither endorsing nor condemning the political ideologies made public by either of these two parties, I believe that people should have the right to speak their mind on any political topic, no matter what their occupation or public status.  I think that acceptance of opposing viewpoints is the most important issue for our country moving forward into the new era of media and politics, and that both sides should be able to express their ideas in a peaceful manner.  I think that LeBron James should be applauded for using his platform to speak out politically during a time of unrest.  I also think that Laura Ingraham should be fully allowed to speak out against James' opinions, whether on television or otherwise, but attempting to silence his opinions is what took her down in this particular instance.

All Values of Expression are Not Created Equal

Various scholars have created over time what we have come to refer to as "Eight Values of Free Expression."  These values are all important, there's no mistake to be made.  The marketplace of ideas, participation in self-government, stable change, individual self-fulfillment, checks on governmental power, promotion of tolerance, promotion of innovation, and the protection of dissent, they all are important factors of why America protects our right to express ourselves. While free expression is something that Americans recognize as a right, it is more than a right.  Free expression is a right that enables us to have privileges, and these privileges are more or less what the eight values are about.  And while all of these are important, I believe that two are more important than the others.

The first value that I believe should be held more highly than the others is that of the protection of dissent.

https://www.rightsanddissent.org/

This idea was first introduced by Steve Shiffrin, who wrote Dissent, Injustice and the Meanings of America.  This idea can be simplified into one statement by saying that it is not simply a right, but a duty to speak out when your opinion is in the minority, in the context of a governmental decision.  This is incredibly important, because it prevents mob rule.  Majority rule is a theoretically sound way to run a government, but not when it completely excludes, or worse condemns, opinions in the minority.

The second value that I believe to be on a different tier of importance than the other six is that of the promotion of tolerance.  Tolerance has been an increasingly important issue in our nation, particularly in the last decade or so.  As hate speech has become more and more present in mainstream news, it's become crucial that we as Americans become educated on it.  Why is this kind of speech wrong? Who does it harm? What can we do to spread awareness about it? These questions are ones that every citizen who claims to be, or wants to be, educated on our nation's culture should ask themselves.

So now the question that you may be asking yourself as a reader: "why are these two more important than the other six?"  The answer is simple, it all relates to having an open mind.  In life, it's crucial to avoid having a closed mind, in any situation.  These two principles exemplify this: they protect those who are different and see things differently from others.  The beauty of democracy is that every voice is heard, even if they are in the minority.  Tolerance and dissent are crucial aspects to maintaining that fact, and preserving our great American democracy.  

While the First Amendment provides us as citizens with incredible rights, and it should be protected with all costs, our democratic form of government should always take precedence.  Our country was founded by a group of people who were once in the minority, when they came to the new world from England.  If we want this country to move forward with the same morals it was founded upon, we need to keep protecting those who are different, which is exactly what these values of free expression do.

History of the United States' Supreme Court

From the time that we as students in the United States of America are in elementary school, we're taught about the three branches of government.  I remember drawing a tree in my 3rd grade class that depicted each "branch" of government, and what it was responsible for.  While the responsibilities of the executive and legislative branches aren't to be understated, the judicial branch holds a special obligation.  They protect our rights when the other two branches infringe upon them.  This all starts with the Supreme Court, something I learned more about from this story by the History Channel.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-resume-oral-argument-telephone-next-month-n1240241

The Supreme Court of the United States has been one of the cornerstones of our country's government since it was conceived, and it continues to become more and more important to our lives as time goes on.  The story by the History Channel, linked previously, taught me things about the Supreme Court that I had no idea about before.  For example, the Judiciary Act of 1789 was news to me.  It was signed by George Washington, and it put the policy of justices (there were six at the time) serving until death or retirement into practice.

Another thing that I didn't know about before reading this story, and while a random fact is probably the most interesting tidbit featured in this article, is about the scheduled first assembly of the Supreme Court.  The first meeting was supposed to be on the 1st of February, in 1790.  However, due to transportation issues on the part of some of the justices', the meeting had to be postponed to the next day.

The most important takeaway I have from this story is that the Supreme Court has "transitioned from being the protector of property rights to the protector of civil liberties."  This is a huge takeaway, because it signals that the importance of human rights has become more and more prevalent in the eyes of our government as time has gone on.

This article made me think of the Supreme Court as more of a thing that is alive, rather than a structure that is made of stone.  The Supreme Court has changed over the course of history to better serve the citizens it has jurisdiction over, making it almost sentient.