Eight Values of Free Expression

  

All eight values are vital in interpreting freedom of speech.

    Freedom of speech is often described in its simplest form: the ability to speak without government interference. But after exploring the Eight Values of Free Expression, I’ve realized that the protection of speech reaches far beyond the right to talk. It shapes identity, challenges power, and teaches society how to coexist with disagreement. Three values stand out to me most today—Self‑Fulfillment, Protect Dissent, and Promote Tolerance—especially in a world where so much of our communication happens online.

    Individual Self-Fulfillment, based on the ideas of C. Edwin Baker, argues that free speech allows people to express themselves and develop their personal identities. This feels especially important when dealing with my generation because so much of our self-expression happens online. We use social media to share our interests, beliefs, experiences, humor, creativity, and opinions. People can also find communities based on experiences or identities that might make them feel isolated in their everyday lives. In that way, I think social media can be important because even ordinary people can express themselves without needing a huge platform like in the past. 

  

C. Edwin Baker outlines Self-Fulfillment. 

    The idea of Self‑Fulfillment, rooted in the work of C. Edwin Baker, argues that free speech allows individuals to express themselves and develop their identities. For my generation, this feels especially relevant. Social media has become the primary space where we share our interests, humor, creativity, beliefs, and experiences. It’s where people discover communities that make them feel seen—especially if they feel isolated in their offline lives.

    In the past, only people with large platforms could broadcast their ideas widely. Today, anyone with a phone can express themselves to an audience. That accessibility is powerful. It means ordinary people can shape culture, challenge norms, and find belonging. But it also means our identities are constantly exposed to public reaction, which brings its own complications.

Free expression can have good and bad effects.

    Even with all this freedom, social media can also silence people. The pressure to fit in can make individuals hesitant to speak. This connects directly to the value of Protect Dissent, which Steve Shiffrin describes as the First Amendment’s protection of minority and unpopular viewpoints. Our system is not meant to operate through “mob rule.” It’s easy to support free speech when someone agrees with us. The real test is whether we still support it when someone’s opinion makes us uncomfortable.

Social media has created a new kind of “mob,” one that doesn’t need to gather physically. Thousands of people can react instantly to a single post. Sometimes that reaction is fair criticism—criticism is also protected speech. But other times, the goal seems less about engaging with an idea and more about making someone afraid to ever speak again.

Protecting dissent doesn’t mean shielding people from criticism. This is where Promote Tolerance, based on Lee Bollinger’s theory, becomes essential. The idea is that allowing even speech we find offensive can teach society how to be tolerant. It gives us the chance to identify harmful ideas, challenge them publicly, and reinforce social norms about what is unacceptable.

Tolerance doesn’t require agreement. And disagreement doesn’t equal censorship. Free expression means people can voice ideas I dislike—and I can respond with ideas of my own.

Social media is both one of the greatest tools and greatest challenges for free expression. It gives more people than ever the ability to find their voice, but it also exposes those voices to immediate judgment from massive audiences.

The Eight Values of Free Expression helped me understand that the First Amendment isn’t just about protecting comfortable or popular speech. It’s about creating a society where people can grow, challenge the majority, hear ideas they dislike, and respond thoughtfully.

Today, the challenge is clear: we have more opportunities to speak than ever before, but that doesn’t mean we’ve become better at listening.

AI Disclosure: I used my clear ideas to generate my thoughts and then utilized Microsoft copilot to format my thinking into a blog style format to appeal to my audience and ensure my grammar is correct while still using my original ideas.

Supreme Court Reflection

 

A gavel that is used in the court by a judge.

    When I first learned about the Supreme Court in AP Government, I understood the basics: it interprets the Constitution, checks the other branches, and decides whether laws are constitutional. But after diving deeper, I realized just how much history, intention, and nuance shape the Court’s power—and why it plays such a crucial role in maintaining balance in our government.

   

 One of the biggest revelations for me was understanding why the Court holds the authority it does. The founders were deeply worried about creating a government that could become as overpowering as Great Britain’s. So, they designed a system where each branch had equal power—or at least, that was the intention.

But history had other plans.

The Court didn’t always have the influence it has today. When John Marshall became Chief Justice, things changed dramatically. The landmark case Marbury v. Madison established judicial review, giving the Court the ability to decide whether government actions are constitutional. That single decision reshaped the balance of power.

I immediately connected this to the Alien and Sedition Acts—laws that made it a crime to criticize the government. Without judicial review, acts like that could have gone unchecked, threatening the First Amendment and opening the door to government overreach.

   Another surprising part was learning how selective the Court is. Out of thousands of petitions, they take only about 100 cases a year. Before watching the videos, I had never heard the term certiorari, but now it makes sense: choosing not to take a case isn’t the same as agreeing with the lower court. It’s simply the Court deciding which issues are important enough to address at the national level. I was also surprised with how selective the Supreme Court is about their cases. They only take around 100 a year even though they get thousands. Before watching the videos I did not hear of the word certiorari. It makes more sense looking at cases that they choose not to take and realizing they aren't just agreeing. 

    As someone who did debate in high school, I imagined Supreme Court arguments as intense, back‑and‑forth battles. But the reality is much more conversational. The justices ask questions, interrupt, push, and probe—not to “win,” but to understand.

And the voting process? It’s far from black and white. There are layers of interpretation, precedent, and constitutional philosophy behind every decision.

The biggest takeaway for me is that the Supreme Court’s power isn’t just written in the Constitution—it’s also rooted in the respect people give its decisions. The entire system was built to limit government power while protecting individual rights, and the Court sits at the center of that balance.

Honestly, it’s become my favorite branch of government. It’s the one that keeps everything in check.

Overall, these videos completely changed how I see the Supreme Court. Most people think of it as nine justices handing down answers, but there’s so much more happening behind the scenes. Every decision involves history, process, debate, and interpretation of a document written centuries ago.

That’s why the Court is both respected and controversial—and why its role in American democracy is so essential.

AI DISCLAIMER: AI was not used in the research and information for this blog post. All information came from notes that I took while watching a video titled "Supreme Court of the United States." I then prompted Microsoft Copilot to help me shape my notes into a blog post. I then added links to online sources that the reader could pursure for more information. Finally I added appropriate images and captions to help break up the type and give the post a more professional look.