Reprint of sole edition. Originally published: New York: Harper Brothers Publishers, [1948]. "Dr. Meiklejohn, in a book which greatly needed writing, hasthought through anew the foundations and structure of our theoryof free speech . . . he rejects all compromise. He reexamines thefundamental principles of Justice Holmes' theory of free speechand finds it wanting because, as he views it, under the Holmesdoctrine speech is not free enough. In these few pages, Holmesmeets an adversary worthy of him . . . Meiklejohn in his own waywrites a prose as piercing as Holmes, and as a foremost Americanphilosopher, the reach of his culture is as great . . . this is the mostdangerous assault which the Holmes position has ever borne." --JOHN P. FRANK, Texas Law Review 27:405-412.ALEXANDER MEIKLEJOHN [1872-1964] was dean of BrownUniversity from 1901-1913, when he became president of AmherstCollege. In 1923 Meiklejohn moved to the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where he set up an experimental college. He was a longtimemember of the National Committee of the American Civil LibertiesUnion. In 1945 he was a United States delegate to the charter meetingof UNESCO in London. Lectureships have been named for him at BrownUniversity and at the University of Wisconsin. He was awarded thePresidential Medal of Freedom in 1963.
Good foundational reading for FA theory. Very clear and easily digestible set of lectures on the idea of self-government as both a historical driver and contemporary result of our understanding and social commitment to the First Amendment. The author shares his theory (broadly stated here) that First Amendment protections are reserved for speech in the “public interest” versus individual personal freedoms separately outlined in the Fifth Amendment (and 14th re state rights). He articulates his reasoning with clarity, along with his argument refuting Justice Holmes’ ruling originating the “clear and present danger” test (and subsequent “balancing” test). Whether or not you agree with his position, the book clearly connects the dots among government repression of speech, what it means to self-govern, and how our contemporary translations of these principles can greatly affect the health of our democracy.