Jill Tate, Republican, 40: I don’t think congress can create a law that violates the constitution and freedom of speech/freedoms of the press. I am fairly confident they are allowed to speak freely already, but I agree that everyone is entitled to freedom of speech through our constitution, rather I like what they are speaking or not

Sonny Wilkinson, 38

I think after 200+ years we’ve bastardized the word freedom. Freedoms are lost when they affect other adversely. That being said, freedoms where originally established by rich white men who owned slaves. Democrat (wouldn’t answer anything else this is all he would said.)

Kendall Kleckner, 18

I would approve of the law. (1) I agree with most of the freedoms, I think some can be taken too literally and as a result taken too far. (2) I support them all in moderation, the only one I find to be excessive is assemble. I am not saying that people shouldn’t be able to protest but a lot of the time these “assemblies” are not peaceful and can result in death and a lot of violence can occur. (3) Yes (4) Not comfortable answering

Cade Gibson, 20

yes I would support this law and I think that it is very similar to the first amendment. (1/2) I agree with and support all the freedoms listed in the first amendment, I think these rights in the 1st amendment are what makes America so appealing to a lot of people. (3) I recognize the law (4) Not sure where I stand on a political scale

Karlee Tate, 25

No, I would most likely not support this law. Overall, I believe our news media outlets need regulation due to the countless amount of people who utilize these outlets as their primary or only resource for information – especially when the source appeals to the individuals personal beliefs and biases. With that being said, it depends on who is providing the regulation. I do not wish for our news media outlets to lose their sense of self but I do think that fair, unbiased, scientifically based regulation would be ideal if possible.
I agree with and support all of the freedoms included in the First Amendment except freedom of the press I suppose bc I fully see the danger of misinformation and the impact our news media outlets have on educating the people of our country.
No I do not recognize the law.
I am a leaning Democrat.

Disa Drury, 50: Well off the top of my head without weighing pros and cons , my immediate reaction is that as it pertains to the news media, the media are supposed to report the facts not give opinion. If their reporting is factual they would not need to be protected by a free speech law. As for individual rights to speak out we already have the 1st amendment for that. So why waste congressional time and out taxpayer money drafting an additional law.

  1. I would support the law but it seems to be redundant, I agree with the 1st amendment right to free speech. It is a fundamental right of this country of which citizens of many countries are not afforded. (2) I don’t feel any are excessive so I support al the freedom. (3) I recognize the law (4) Republican

Natalie Edmonds, 18

Would you approve of the following law if Congress were considering it? Possibly

  1. I disagree with this freedom not because I disagree with freedom of speech but because the media is already so biased and it needs to be more fact based to lessen the divide of American’s
  1. I think if people anyone has the opportunity to share their opinion in such a public manner like in the media it can get out of hand so it is too much freedom
  2. Yes
  3. Registered Democrat (more moderate than far leaning)

Throughout the different groups I noticed that the older generations seemed to recognize the law i gave them as the first amendment. I think that the older generations seemed to recognize it because they have been around long enough and truthfully I believe their education was more proficient. All of them support the 1st Amendment, but not all supported my law i gave them even though they are the same which i find odd. My subjects, judge the freedoms positively. I think they knew what the first amendment on a surface level, meaning they new we had the freedom or speech, religion assembly, petition etc. What impresses me is some of them put a lot of thought into their answers and were very passionate. Only thing I find alarming in the responses is that the younger they are, they seem to be less passionate and don’t recognize the law.