Abstract
This paper examines the critical role played by the first amendment in business. Keeping in mind the government’s definition of the values of the first amendment, the paper uncovers the regulations of free business speech. There exists a difference in free commercial speech and other free speeches such as incitement to convey political messages outlined in the first amendment. One major problem affecting the implementation of the first amendment in business is that there is less protection of speech in business than in other areas of the public sphere. With political interest affecting the enforcement of free business speech, one important solution to address the problem, among others, is drawing constitutionally valid lines have to be drawn between commercial speech and political speech in the subject of giving consent. The first amendment in business is the first line of defense against the abuse of power by the government.
The First Amendment
Introduction
For many decades, the first amendment has protected the freedom of assembly and petition, the freedom of religion, and the freedom of the speech to the press only in theory. The 20th century has seen the challenge of the government in courts where a belief was held on assaulting certain rights, making the first amendment to take a more reliable interpretation (Garden, 2016). The first amendment is the most potent instrument in the protection of sacred freedoms of religion, press, speech, assembly, and petition of modern Americans. It is also vital in the daily running of corporations and businesses. This essay focuses on analyzing the first amendment by discussing how critical it is to business and government, and the rights that are guaranteed in it.
The Problem
The First Amendment
The first amendment is the first line of defense against the abuse of power by the government. It mentions that congress shall establish laws that respect the creation of religion, or prohibition of exercising freely thereof or abiding by speaking freely, the right of the press, and people assembling cohesively to conduct petitions against the authorities when addressing their grievances. The Bill of Rights that is the first amendment interprets the rights of individuals to express themselves and to have a free press. It limits the ability of the authority to prevent freedom of speech, religion, and expression (Redish & Voils, 2017) the most cherished and defended liberties in the United States is freedom of speech. In the first amendment of the American constitution, congress cannot pass laws that prevent freedom of speech.
The Extent of the Problem-How the Bill Is Critical to Business?
Firstly, the first individuals perceive the first amendment to relate to just the rights of the individuals. However, it also impacts the rights of business institutions and business leaders need to be aware of the rights within the first amendment to their consumers and employees. Firms and individuals can speak to the world and the nation, especially with the rapid growth of cheap and easy mass communication (Redish & Voils, 2017). Running a public speech counter to public opinions might generate an adverse public response that can damage the ego of a business sales opportunity and shrink the customer base. At their destruction and profits, businesses exercise freedom of speech; this is the beauty of the free market and the open society. The first amendment enables firms and organizations to suggest what they like, and customers can decide on whether they choose one service or product over another.
Secondly, when it comes to the restriction of the government in the business world, it is vital to understand that speech in businesses is less protected compared to other areas. Companies are hardly subjected to laws regarding consumer protection, copyright and trademark laws, regulatory agencies, and workers’ discrimination. Under the first amendment, there are various exceptions that the courts have developed that are specific to the business world. Since freedom of speech is one of the essential elements of the first amendment, the amendment offers safety and prevents the government from passing laws that restrict access to data in books, newspapers, and the internet. According to the supreme court, commercial speech entails the speaker selling a good or service and addressing their target market with the message related to the business (Redish & Voils, 2017). This type of speech includes internet advertisements, television ads, and flyers handed in the streets. During the analysis of the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press in the business setting, based on the fact that courts can decide on the misleading nature of a marketing message, corporate website content, and other commercial information, commercial speech is vital.
Thirdly, the first amendment issue rights for workers in businesses. One instance is that regardless of the opinions of the boss or managers, employees in government positions that are highly regulated can attend political strikes during their free time. All businesses must understand this law unless they want to be sued (Baude & Volokh, 2018). business owners and executives are made to grasp the freedom of expression and speech. In the first amendment, disciplining workers for posting individual comments on social media is subject to a lawsuit. Also, the first amendment upholds rights to corporations where courts allow profits that are held closely to be exempted from regulations where owners object primarily on religious grounds.
Who Is Affected-The Rights Guaranteed by The First Amendment
The first amendment guarantees the freedom of religion, expression to American citizens, freedom of the press, and allowing individuals in the United States to gather in groups and ask the government to solve problems (Garden, 2016). One essential component of the first amendment is the establishment clause that forbids the state from imposing a national religion in America. Also, there is the free exercise clause that prevents Congress from establishing laws that restrict free religious exercise.
The true meaning of freedom of speech has in most cases brought problems among institutions and businesses. The right does not constitute private businesses meaning that the businesses have the authority to fire an employee for voicing their political view in the workplace. Most businesses thus exercise their right of speech at their own profit or risk because, with the rise in modern communication modes, they have the capacity to speak to the nation. When an individual speaks to the nation and the speech runs opposite to the public opinion, it can generate a negative reaction from the public thus posing a risk to the business’ reputation and damaging the sales and opportunities. In the commercial world, the first amendment presents the beauty of a free market and a free society where individuals have the full right to say what they like and consumers have the freedom to chooses one product or service over others.
Cause Effects of The Problem
According to Brudney (2012), large publicly owned cooperation has an effect on government policies. It is undeniable that the large businesses can move the government using formal or non-formal consultation to making goals and policies that favor them. Thus, since the free commercial speech faces challenges on what to consider free speech and what not to consider, large corporations unlike small businesses can take to their advantage and form policies that favor and profit their businesses. The business free speech is critical to both employees and management in business, but the problem remains that the restrictions have been aimed at political contributions.
The narrow contours offered by the court for commercial speech fails to serve the values of the constitution. The court relies on social values to justify the protection of commercial speech by the first amendment instead of an individual’s autonomy in conducting their personal life. Necessary conditions that validate some tolerance for false and misleading expression in the market of notions and the development of the culture of a society are generally lacking in the context of commercial speech (Brudney, 2012). There is not enough clarity on how to classify certain cases relating to the violation of laws in the area of commercial business.
Possible Solution
One main solution to problems that arise as a result of free speech is that constitutionally valid lines have to be drawn between commercial speech and political speech in the subject of giving consent. There must be a test to show that the case illegal and runs afoul of the first amendment. The development of the central Hudson test in 1980 was necessary to the extent to which the regulation of commercial speech should go before it is protected by the first amendment (Schultz, n.d.). In the case; Central Hudson Gas and Electric Corp. vs. Public Service Commission (1980), the justices of the supreme court proposed a test that involves the process where they must first decide if the expression of speech is fraudulent or illegal (Schultz, n.d.). If the speech is considered illegal, then the government can regulate it without first amendment restrictions. If the expression is not illegal, then the court has to assert that the government’s interest is substantial. Through this Hudson test, courts in the United States have nullified many laws that regulate commercial speech.
Conclusion
In the modern world, the role of the business corporation is a controversial one. Some individuals are afraid of the objection to utilizing corporate power and influence over legislation, the government, and cultures. To others, corporations are chances to strengthen a personal initiative of like-minded individuals who will further essential and common objectives. In American law, the business world has evolved from being an entity that the government allowed to be established only as a special privilege. It was restricted in terms of power and size to being formed freely with few limitations to strength and size. Interpretation of the first amendment is easy as court after court attempts to limit the freedoms entailed in it, with its definitions evolving throughout American history. As corporate-friendly decisions coincide with the widespread pushing of the protection of business interest, the public though continues to advocate for the broader grasping of the first amendment, and this may result in campaign finance decisions that will reflect the struggle for democratic legitimacy, better.
References
Baude, W., & Volokh, E. (2018). Compelled Subsidies and the First Amendment. Harv. L. Rev., 132, 171. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/hlr132&div=7&id=&page=
Garden, C. (2016). The Deregulatory First Amendment at Work. Harv. CR-CLL Rev., 51, 323. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/hcrcl51&div=13&id=&page=
Redish, M. H., & Voils, K. (2017). False commercial speech and the First Amendment: understanding the implications of the equivalency principle. William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, 25(3), 765. Retrieved from https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1808&context=wmborj
Brudney, V. (2012). The First Amendment and Commercial Speech. BCL Rev., 53, 1153. Retrieved from https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=3251&context=bclr
Schultz, D. (n.d.). Commercial speech. Middle Tennessee State University | Middle Tennessee State University. Retrieved May 21, 2020, from https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/900/commercial-speech