this sunday morning. we will see you back here next saturday at 8:00 a.m. eastern. be sure to follow us on social media at "the sky, as well. velshi continues our coverage. good morning, ali. >> i'm liking the blue sky thing. it harkens back to the old, early days of social media where people sort of said nice things and posted information you might like to talk about, maybe got into an argument or debate with you, but it's got a different flavor and may it stay that way. i really hope on.

>> yes. >> and i want people to get in with a lot of different views and actually be in good, robust debates, but it's lacking a certain meanness that i've grown tired of, so -- >> it's a good, clean feel to it. it's clean conversations, like you said. there's debate and not a lot of the crazy, stupid noise. >> and a little less meanness so i appreciate that. you guys have a fantastic week and weekend. i'll see you next week. "velshi" starts now. ♪♪ ♪♪ good morning. sunday, november 24th, 57 days until donald trump's inauguration and his administration is taking shape. as of today, trump has named all 15 heads of executive departments and many other top administration posts for the start of his second term including ten announcements made in just the past two days. he chose anti-vaxxers and

skeptics of science, a fossil fuel executive and other allies of the oil and gas industry. people with little or no experience in leading large organizations and people tied with neo-nazis and christian ideologies and a number of people who want to implement aggressive deregulation plans. all of that could spell trouble and result in lasting damage to public health, the climate, the environment, national security, foreign policy and the basic functioning of our federal government. clearly, there's a lot at stake and it might be naive that trump might be more restrained this time around, but small, though it may be, we have just witnessed the first defeat of trump 2.0. the first, successful pushback against his agenda which came when the former congressman matt gaetz was forced to withdraw his name from consideration for attorney general. gaetz stepped back a few days ago as details continue to be reported about the sexual misconduct allegations that he'd faced and continues to deny. that's on top of the fact that

he's one of the least liked people on capitol hill, a fire brand who irked many of his former colleagues. not even vice president-elect j.d. vance could help him rehabilitate his reputation enough to salvage the chance of becoming the next attorney general, setting aside the fact that he's grossly unqualified for the position in the first place. shortly after gaetz and vance spent a day meeting with senators on capitol hill to gauge gaetz's chances of becoming confirmed, gaetz dropped out. it was reported that there were at least five republican senators who were firmly opposed to his bid for attorney general, the senate minority leader mitch mcconnell, lisa murkowski, and senator-elect john curtis. at least 20 and as many as 30 republican senators were uncomfortable with the prospect of having to vote to confirm gaetz for the role. which suggests that there are still possibly some safeguards

in place that could be possibly, maybe deployed against presidential overreach. i'm not being pollyannaish here. i'm just telling you that someone stood up to trump and it worked. in this case, the senate acted as a bull work. it took responsibility of advice and consent seriously and prevented an unserious and unqualified candidate from even being formally nominated. in 57 days donald trump will regain the most powerful office in the world and he would wield his influence much more forcefully once he's back in the white house and his party will control the house and the senate for the next two years and it is not the overwhelming mandate that they would like you to believe that it is. there are majorities in both chambers of congress are narrow and precarious and we know how dysfunctional republicans can be as a caucus, and we know something else. donald trump has learned from his first term in office and is stepping into this second term with an eye to removing every

guardrail that stood in the way of his lawless impulses before and we learned lessons from trump's first term. we learned pressure works and minds can be changed. that ordinary americans can raise voices and whistle blowers can shine light in the shadows and there are capable government employees and military personnel and journalists who can muster great bravery in order to speak out and push back. on november 5th, we learned that the trump era of american politics is not over. we learned that our work is not over. the work to win back democracy from the brink is not done and now it's time to figure out what that work looks like. joining me now is the democratic representative stacy plaskett of the irj inislands and a ranking member on the weaponization of the federal government, however, that's not the principal reason she's with us today. she served as an impeachment manager for donald trump's

second impeachment trial, but was also an employee, a member of the department of justice so she knows how these things work on the inside. representative, thank you for being here with us today. thank you for being with us. >> good. thanks for having me. i was a representative at the justice department under a republican administration, i was a republican political appointee, so very different. >> this is all relevant to the conversation, right? >> sure. >> there are people in government regardless of their politics, i use the word politics not ideology, because your ideology should be pro-government, pro-democracy, pro the people you serve, and there are still tens if not hundreds of thousands of people in every branch of government in the department of justice, in the various departments, in the military who still believe that is their primary responsibility. the constitution and the country comes over the president and ideology. >> sure. i think that we see that and

that is one of the reasons that so many americans who have looked at project 2025 are concerned with the notion of removing those career employees and putting in individuals who pass loyalty tests, and i would also say, ali, that i think that what we saw with matt gaetz is not just the first repudiation of something that trump wanted, but the second because behind closed doors during negotiations, when individuals do not have to give their votes publicly, we saw that again the president-elect did not get his way when they chose ne as the majority leader for republicans. >> that's right. >> rather than president trump's pick of either being cornyn or rick scott. so if you get individuals and do the negotiations not in public, but behind closed doors you will see that there will be a lot of pushback and a different kind of

government is going to try and hold up the democracy that we have. >> another conversation for another day, but it's one of the reasons secret ballots work because when these senators could actually vote the way they wanted to vote, they didn't take trump's guy, and they were threatened. elon musk said we'll primary you, lindsey gram said we'll primary you if you don't pick trump's guy and two times they decided not to pick trump's guy. for a lot of government employees, civil servant, fbi agents and people in the cia and people in every government department, they may not publicly come out and say anything, but they may be the ones inside their department about to execute something and this is not legal and this is not in compliance with my allegiance to the constitution of the united states, and i will not do it. >> yes. that's the hope. that's the -- and it's also for us in congress to give people that ability and that leeway, and as well as the media yourself, by pointing out those

individuals and putting out information to americans as to what approximately sees what policies are going to hurt them. they will continue with the very, very close margin that we have of reminding hardworking americans, reminding american taxpayers of what their rights are and those policies which are going to hurt them and their families, and that is going to be amplified in our media in places like msnbc, but also in other places where americans are getting their news. that's the thing that we have realized and understood that we've got to be speaking not just to the american people in language that they can understand, but in the places that they're receiving their communication. >> how do we, and i say we meaning you in congress, we as msnbc, we in the media ensure that those people, the people who will have their fidelity to the constitution, the people who may be whistle blowers will --

will -- will have -- we will be in solidarity with others? that there is value to standing up because what the trump administration would have you believe is that if you stand up you will face remarkable consequences in your career, in your livelihood and possibly in your family and your safety, and we would like to tell people that is a personal choice for you to make, but if you make that choice you will alone. >> sure. listen, as the ranking member on the select subcommittee weaponization, we saw it so many times with individuals that we would reach out to about testifying who in the end decided that they did not want to because of fear of being dodged, fear of individuals coming at them and in social media. you all talked about a new platform, blue sky which was nicer where people didn't feel like their lives would be in danger, so i think that what we

can do is we saw americans who would be willing to come out and to say this. i think we're going to try and give them the rule of law and the support of our democracy, of media to protect them for doing the right thing. by letting them know that we have house oversight, we have mechanisms within the house to protect them and to provide supports to them. at the same time providing support for ourselves. there are so many members of congress that are right now under threat, in their constituency in their home for saying the truth, and we have to know that we cannot back down from the truth. we cannot give up the rights that we've had or the opportunities for our children by being afraid of repudiation. >> congresswoman, it is great to talk to you as always. thank you for being with us today. democratic representative stacey plaskett of the united states virgin islands. with donald trump trying to undo

the climate initiative, i'm talk to jay inslee in the effort to curb climate change, plus what rfk jr. at the head of the health and human services department will mean for the future of public health in america. i'll discuss with the former hhs secretary kathleen sebelius. plus doris kerns goodwin joins us to discuss the best path forward to bridge the divide in the country and why history gives her hope. you're watching "velshi" on hs nbc. but when it comes to working from home, i gotta have every part of my house clean. that means tidying up, then spraying my febreze air mist, to leave every room smelling fresh and clean. with that done, it's time to get to work. ♪ la la la la la the virus that causes shingles is sleeping... in 99% of people over 50. it's lying dormant, waiting... and could reactivate. shingles strikes as a painful, blistering rash that can last for weeks. and it could wake at any time.

think you're not at risk for shingles? it's time to wake up. because shingles could wake up in you. if you're over 50, talk to your doctor or pharmacist about shingles prevention. say christmas. christmas! for holiday traditions old and new, when you want gifts to express a lifetime of love. we've spent a lifetime crafting them. harry & david, 90 years and still sharing.

oh... stuffed up again? so congested! you need sinex saline from vicks. just sinex, breathe, ahhhh! what is — wow! sinex. breathe. ahhhhhh! honey...

but the gains are pumping! the market's closed. futures don't sleep in the after hours, bro. dad, is mommy a “finance bro?” she switched careers to make money for your weddings. ooh! penny stocks are blowing up. sweetie, grab your piggy bank, we're going all in. let me ask you. for your wedding, do you want a gazebo and a river? uh, i don't... what's a gazebo? something that your mother always wanted and never got. or...you could give these different investment options a shot. the right money moves aren't as aggressive as you think. i'm keeping the vest.

let's go boys. the way that i approach work, post fatherhood, has really been trying to understand the generation that we're building devices for. here in the comcast family, we're building an integrated in-home wifi solution for millions of families, like my own. connectivity is a big part of my boys' lives. it brings people together in meaningful ways. ♪ ♪ his core cabinet picks for his next term announcing brooke rowland, a former trump administration official and president of the america first

policy institute which is a right-wing organization established in 2021 to help shape policy for trump's next term. during trump's last term she served as domestic approximately see chief for the white house. if confirmed by the senate she would lead an agency with 100,000 employees with the mandate to oversee ebt, rural development trade and a whole lot more. rollins' selection follows a flurry of picks when trump made his choice for high-cabinet and nine administration positions in just over an hour. let's get right to msnbc news correspondent julie soshgin who has been following. they let you out of washington which is kind of amazing. >> they did! >> this is breakneck speed at which he is nominating people, there's a certain consistency and some people he's nominated that might have trouble being confirmed and there are people

outside of the mainstream even of conservative viewpoints and a few in there who he won't have trouble getting confirmed and they might have outlandish views and more in keeping with what appointments look like. how will this be managed by the congress and the senate. >> it's exactly how you laid out. he had some picks that i could see democrats voting for like losing support from republicans and his labor secretary bid like laurie chavez who i spoke to because she worked across the aisle on immigration and labor. >> she's pro-union. >> i could see her losing some republican support seven so that could be something interesting to watch. someone like brooke rollins that you talked about, she had an endorsement from speaker johnson who doesn't necessarily have to vote to confirm her, but the traditional republican mainstream on capitol hill is happy even though she was somebody plucked from trump's policy institute and his america first policy institute, so you

have this group of people, these group of characters rounding about. rfk jr. is someone who can lose republican votes. >> a couple who have found some of it interesting. >> absolutely and of course, the handful of picks and pat bondi and pete hegseth which will be fine and rfk, jr., tulsi gabbard, that's the one that i think flew under the radar a little bit under matt gaetz. >> with gaetz not the lightning rod at the moment, is it hegseth and gabbard who folks are worrieded about? >> i think it's gabbard on a different level than hegseth. i know we talk about the allegations and the police report against hegseth and it's disturbing, but most republicans who met with him on thursday say they believe he and his lawyers' version of events and will work with walz, so they see grown-ups around him and he is someone who

has him military experiential though most people know him from being a fox news personality and he's not in the same boat as tulsi gabbard would be and that is somebody who -- she just became a republican two seconds ago and so for republicans in the capitol that is concerning, right? the biggest piece of this is her parroting foreign adversary talking points, putin's talking points and we hear that a lot from democrats and she'll face that from hawks on the senate committee. you have folks concerned about some of her views and her contacs, and she has to get out of that committee to make it on the floor. >> good to see you here in person. something a lot of people don't know here. you and i worked together for a long time along a lot of shows, it's great to see the fantastic work you're doing. >> thank you. the team donald trump has drafted to oversee america's public health is a doozy, a vaccine scentic to lead health and human services, a fox news contributor to lead the fda and

a doctor to oversee medicare and medicaid. i'll decide what this all means for former health and human services secretary kathleen sebelius coming up next.

♪♪ ♪♪ the next trump administration's public health team has taken shape this week including three new picks for key roles that were announced on friday. here's a look at where we stand. for director for the centers of disease control and prevention trump picked dr. dave weldon, a physician and former u.s. congressman who has advocated the extensively debunked and repeatedly proven to be false claim that vaccines cause autism. he's trump's pick to run the cdc, an age tapped with disease prevention including with making recommendations for vaccine and

immunization schedules. for commissioner for the food and drug administration, he has tapped dr. marty mckarty, he's trump's pick to run the fda, an agency whose mandates include approving vaccines. for surgeon general trump chose dr. janette nashiwat, a flgz and fox news contributor at city m.d., a chain of urgent care centers in new york city and new jersey. she specializes in emergency and family medicine. earlier in the week the president-elect chose the former tv doctor, mehmet oz to lead the center for medicare and medicaid services, cms, as we call it. he's pushed junk science and debunked medical misinformation throughout his career as a tv talk show host including supplements and health advice much of which is not supported by evidence or scientific study.

he's promoted weight loss supplements that don't work, and it was deemed useless in the treatment of covid by the medical community. dr. oz has invested heavily in multiple health care and pharmaceutical companies some of which were tied directly to the agency that he was tapped to run. now each of those physicians and agencies falls under the department of health and human services. hhs, as it's more commonly known handles a budget of over $1.7 trillion annually and sends more funds to states than all other domestic 85,000 employees and plays a huge role in promoting health, wellness and disease prevention both domestically and around the world. so given all of that trump's choice to lead the critical department is none other than robert f kennedy, jr., he's an environmental lawyer, but over the these he's pushed

anti-vaccine and says there's no vaccine that's safe and effective. he's posted medical misinformation including debunked claims linking vaccines to various medical conditions including autism. he's suggest that the government remove fluoride from water, and eating raw milk, and he's urged people to resist cdc guidance. he's been vocal in his skepticism of the covid vaccine. he's been linked to conspiracy theories suggesting the covid pandemic was planned by the government as a means to control the public. covid was planned by the government as a means to control the public. trump chose rfk with the promise that he would, quote, let him go wild on health, end quote, and while rfk said he won't ban vaccines and he continues to promote mistrust on vngss accind

institutes that protect our public health and our top medical institutions which will likely discourage people from opting to get vaccines that prevent deadly and debilitating diseases. public health programs, especially disease prevention, work when they are enacted on a large scale generally by the government. when an effort to inoculate a population against a disease works it is and should be largely invisible to the public. the absence of an outbreak, the lack of a crisis is proof of a successful public health program. no one notices when it works because that's the point. nothing has gone wrong. when your public health system is strong you don't notice that kids don't get measles or polio or whooping cough, for instance in the 1950s and the 1960s just before vaccines became publicly available the u.s. saw more than half a million cases of the disease and hundreds of people

died from it every year. you can see it here on the top left, but now that americans routinely get the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine, the mayo clinic's most recent count, 621 versus 162,000 before there was vaccine of mumps, six cases of rubella versus 48,000 before mumps. take a look at this. diphtheria, smallpox, polio, eradicated, zero cases, zero cases. there were 200,000 cases of diphtheria, now there are zero. despite that the cdc found vaccination rates in america are falling. since 2019, childhood vaccination rates have begun to decline. child mmr vaccinations, measles, mumps and rubella, fell below the target rate of 95% in more than three-quarters of all 50 states. in the last year alone, more than 30 states experienced declines in vaccination rates

against all state-required vaccines including mmr and dtap which are against the polio, whooping cough and vehicleses. measles cases while still rare, have been on the rise. 280 cases of measles have been reported in the united states this year. in 2022, the united states saw the first case of polio in more than a decade and it appeared here in new york state. so now 57 days away from the next trump administration which brings the promise of a public health apparatus run by someone who pushed false and dangerous notions about public health it is time to get real about what happens next. after the quick break i'll be joined by kathleen sebelius, health and human services secretary during the obama administration. services secretary during the obama adnimistration oh... stuffed up again? so congested! you need sinex saline from vicks. just sinex, breathe, ahhhh!

what is — wow! sinex. breathe. ahhhhhh! what's up, you seem kinda sluggish today. things aren't really movin'. you could use some metamucil. metamucil's psyllium fiber helps keep your digestive system moving so you can feel lighter and more energetic. metamucil keeps you movin'. and try fizzing fiber plus vitamins. i'm having trouble getting around but i want to live in my home. i can do it with the help of a barber, personal shopper, an exercise buddy. life's good. when you have a plan. ♪♪

before the break, i told you about the litany of picks that donald trump made for various public health positions in his administration. most notably the selection of antivaxxer robert f. kennedy, jr. to be the next hhs secretary. for more on how this could affect the health of millions of americans, i am joined by kathleen sebelius, former governor of kansas. thank you for being here. i want to talk to you about some of the specifics here, but i actually want to get your take

on this larger point that when public health works we don't all know it and that's the point, right? we don't have certain diseases and die of things premuch you areally and our longevity is greater because of public health things are invisible to us but part fact that we get our kids immunized and vaccine boosters every now and then. >> that's right, ali. good to see you again. i think that preventive health is what it's really about, and what i find really ironic is most of the nominees in the new hhs hierarchy under donald trump have stated their dedication to disease prevention, are interested in working on chronic diseases, are interested in, you know, focusing on america's health. that's all great, and i think that's something all americans believe in and can buy into, but

the prevention of infectious diseases which as you just pointed out on your setup, it used to ravage this country. i was in the kindergarten line taking sugar cubes for the polio vaccine a long time ago. people don't remember that who are not as old as i am, but that was a terrifying disease when i was a child. it is no longer a problem in this country. prevention means things don't happen, terrible things don't happen. >> robert f. kennedy, jr., said he's not going to take away vaccine, but he's pushed the idea of vaccine choice and they become less effective at controlling the spread of disease and it's the kind of thing that you get the government involved in. some people get busy, some people don't get inoculated. it's not just about people who think a vaccine causes autism which has been debunked and it's the idea that if it's not a government problem or something

that the school gettious to do, fewer people to do it and then you end up putting more people at risk. tell me what the right approach is for people that take vaccines? >> well, i think you have just outlined, we don't have a lot of vaccine mandates in this country. what we do have is for children and infants, requirements really set at the state level based on the cdc menu of recommended vaccines so if a child wants to attend child care or if their parents want to put their child in child care, if the parents want to send their children to a public school there are vaccines at the state and local level that are required because what we know is, as you said, if you drop about 95% immunized, then disease can spread. again, a disease -- a child can carry a disease into a school

and measle, for instance, is wildly contagious. so making it personal? i have an 11-month-old grandson. i live in a state where we have dropped below a 95% vaccination rate, but at 11 months he's too young to get the measles vaccine. he's going to need three of them, but he cannot immunize himself so having other people protect him is the only way to keep him safe and secure. >> so we're talking at this point is things many of us think of as routine and we never give a second thought to inoculating your child against vaccines. >> that's right. >> however, we just had a massive pandemic. we are seeing an uptick in avian flu and i don't know if that will get to pandemic proportions, and we did not have that under the last administration, and it does seem like we are set up under this administration for a whole bunch of people who have not been trained in that area of -- of medicine and public health and

that worries me a little bit that we have a whole bunch of people who think, you know, we don't really need to manage these things as a government, it doesn't work when you don't manage it as a government. >> well, i think you're absolutely right. we saw during the last trump administration scientific evidence put forward and that's based on knowledge and measurement and analysis, and then countered immediately, often by the president himself from the podium at the white house suggesting hydroxychloroquine, which now the head of cms and the nominated head of cms recommended that totally debunked medication. we have, i think, a totally disqualifying statement by the nominee for hhs secretary which is there is no safe and effective vaccine. that is really dangerous in this country. it's really dangerous for lots of people and saying to folks, make up your own mind.

we'll put phony science side by side with real science and we'll let you make a determination and we'll keep everybody on its own. that is a very dangerous place for public health in the united states. >> yeah. i think public health, people have rights to did all sorts of things and if you don't want to take cough medication for a cough these are different than infectious diseases and things that kill large numbers of people in the past that we've been able to manage. thanks for your insight, kathleen sebelius is former health and human services secretary under president obama and former governor of kansas. up next, the reality of the first amendment. my next guest argues that unfettered free speech does not exist, but for certain americans and that it's time to redefine the boundaries of the law in the modern era. ere, but with 6-times the data. can your smartwatch do that? introducing kardiamobile 6l, the fda-cleared ekg that provides 6-times more heart data than any smartwatch.

and it detects three of the most common arrhythmias in just 30 seconds, including atrial fibrillation, bradycardia and tachycardia. get kardiamobile 6l for just $99 right now, our lowest price of the year, at kardia.com or amazon.

what are folks 60 and older learning these days? new perspectives! ♪♪ how to fix things. ♪♪ fun recip... (high pitched sound)

(high pitched sound) (high pitched sound) [ screeching ] [ chuckling ] (hi[ vocalizing ]nd) that's a choice. [ vocalizing ] think of what we could do together. trump's selection win along with his cabinet pick, the who's

who of unqualified loyalists and handful of conspiracies only underscores that the real winner of this year's election was the algorithm, it only intensified the debate over the proverbial town square is monopolized by wealthy elites. our current understanding of the free speech clause comes from early 20th century supreme court decisions including one from justice oliver wendell holmes whose famous concept of the marketplace of ideas, the theory that a free and opec change of ideas will allow the best ones to prevail simply on their merits, but that theory has been increasingly tested in the era where information is filtered through algorithms to prioritize profit or perhaps nefarious messages over truth and arguably, the first amendment falls short because it was never intended to protect those who can't afford the megaphone. there's no such thing as a false idea which went on to influence later cases and supports a

maximalist approach to free speech meaning the more speech the better presumes a level playing field, one in which all ideas compete equally and in reality the struggle for free speech in america has fundamentally been a fight for access. george washington law professor marianne franks wrote, quote, when the drafters of the constitution set out the rights of we the people, meant people like themselves, white, male and christian. throughout our history it has in practice, subordinated the women and minorities to the white, wealthy men, social hierarchies which she calls radically democratic speech of equality and inclusion or in the title of her book, fearless speech has been despised and violently suppressed throughout american history. in the 1830s, for example, abolitionist literature, one of the first radical speech movements in america was violently suppressed by southern legislatures. the 1873 comstock act banned

contact related to women's sexuality and reproductive health under the guise of public morality and that is still in the books and that could be used against women very quickly. black lives matter protesters were tear gassed and jailed. the mythical status of the uncompromising guardian of free expression for all is the product of historical revisionism and limited imagination. what has been protected in the united states above all is not fearless speech in the service of equality, but rather reckless speech in the service of racial and gender hierarchy, while great strides have been made over the centuries to transform americans' false claim of democracy into a true one, the original ruling class has done everything it can to resist this. the values of white male supremacy and the speech that reenforces them have always received heightened protections in our society, end quote. franks argues that historically

americans who have advocated for justice and challenged the status quo have more often than not been denied the same protections of the first amendment. white wealthy men, for example, continue to assert their dominance over these same groups. today's republican party is actively working, as i mentioned, to revive the comstock act in order to police women's sexuality, bodily autonomy, abortion, the pill. while republican officials throughout the country are banning books and activery rewriting history to suppress inconvenient truths, recent supreme court decisions including buckley v.valeo and citizens united have exacerbated this imbalance with billionaires literally with free speech. allowing the wealthy elite to monopolize the marketplace of ideas while leaving ordinary americans powerless to compete and nowhere is this more evident than in the digital sphere where information is filtered and

controlled by those who own the platforms. elon elon musk's x is widely credited with helping donald trump win the presidency and once touted as the digital town square, x has morphed into a toxic space that am plifies hate speech making the free and open ideas obsolete. when powerful tech companies control public discourse, shredding any sense of sharshar reality this vast imbalance undermines the foundational promise of free speech, and that's probably why a growing number of legal scholars say that it's high time that we visit our approach to the first amendment if we truly desire a more democratic society. according to marianne franks, quote, the first amendment in theory is neutral with regard to the matter of speech it protects. in practice, it has been deployed most visibly and effectively in the service of

powerful antidemocratic interests, misogyny, racism, religious fundamentalism and corporate self-interest, end quote. the first amendment should protect everyone, she argues, not just those with the means to amplify their voice otherwise this marketplace of ideas will ring hollow serving the rich and powerful leaving we the people to suffer the consequences. franks argues that we need to reimagine our relationship it, where free speech does not defined boundaries of law. throughout history extraordinary and inspiring speak verse risked their safety, their reputation and lives, most of them were never plaintiffs in famous first amendment cases championed by the american civil liberties union or lionized in hollywood films, but their stories and their speech can enlarge our understanding and appreciation of the gift of speech and its role in the unfinished project

of quality, end quote. professor marianne franks is the author of "fearless speech, breaking free of the first amendment." she joins me after a quick break. look. here. try secret whole body deodorant. it doesn't leave an icky residue. and it actually gives me 72 hour odor protection... everywhere. secret whole body deodorant. speaker: who's coming in the driveway? speaker: dad. dad, we missed you. daddy, hi. speaker: goodness. my daughter is being treated for leukemia. [music playing] i hope that she lives a long, great, happy life and that she will never forget how mom and daddy love her. saint jude-- maybe this is what's keeping my baby girl alive. [music playing] narrator: you can join the battle to save lives by supporting st. jude children's research

hospital. for just $19 a month, you'll help us continue the life-saving research and treatment these kids need now and in the future. speaker: cancer makes me feel angry, like not in the feel on the outside, just the inside. i'm angry at it. speaker: when your kid is hurting and there's nothing you can do about it, that's the worst feeling in the world. [music playing] narrator: 1 in 5 children diagnosed with cancer in the us will not survive. speaker: those that donate to st. jude, i hope that you will continue to give. they have done so much for me and my family. [music playing] narrator: join with your credit or debit card for only $19 a month, and we'll send you this st. jude t-shirt, or, for a limited time only, join for $39 a month to receive this exclusive st. jude

jacket you can proudly wear to show your support. speaker: are you ready to go have some fun? speaker: yeah. speaker: when we came here, we didn't know what tomorrow would hold. st. jude showed us that tomorrow, there's hope for our little girl to survive. narrator: let's cure childhood cancer together. please donate now. [music playing] ♪♪ vicks vapostick provides soothing non-medicated vicks vapors. easy to apply for the whole family. vicks vapostick. and try new vaposhower max for steamy vicks vapors.

♪ ♪ ♪ something has changed within me ♪ ♪ it's time to try defying gravity ♪ ♪ ♪ before the break, i told you

about a growing movement calling for a reexamination of the first amendment's free speech protections. joining me to discuss this argument is marian franks, professor of intellectual property and civil rights law at george washington law school, president of the civil rights initiative and the author of a newly released book called fearless speech, breaking free from the first amendment. professor franks, great to see you again. thank you for being on the show with us this morning. >> thank you for having me. >> it's a complicated argument you make, but you're arguing that the first amendment is both somewhat misunderstood by people and misused historically by people. it's not the great equalizer we have often thought that it should be. >> that's right. i think we tell ourselves this kind of myth that the first amendment has always kind of stood up for the little person, for the person who has been dissenting for the vulnerable, but when you look at history, it turns out that the first amendment has played a small

role in defending those who have spoken out against oppression and inequality. in many cases the first amendment has been used against those trying to speak out in that way. as americans we have a hard time coming to terms with that because we really want to believe that the first amendment is this kind of shining beacon it has always been throughout history. >> and you write very early in examples in which free speech has protected a lot of people who, look, we may not like their view, but it has protected some pretty outrageous things, but has not come to the safe defense of those who would fight abligsz, who would fight for the right of women to vote, who would fight for the right of black people to enjoy equal civil rights in the country, for the black lives matter movement. you pointed out that for whatever reason the law has not protected people who want social change and want to change our hierarchies the same way it would preserve those in the ire

arkys. >> right. and that goes against exactly the story that we often tell ourselves. we often say the first amendment is there for those doing the radical thing, who are arguing for justice and we like to believe that. we like to say that it's for the disempowered and the vulnerable, but when you look at what gets characterized that way. when we talk about who is the unlikable speech or the controversial speech, it turns out it is not those people, it's people like neo-nazis or it's the kkk or pornographers or people that for whatever else there might be, they're not disempowered. they're not speaking something radical for the vilgdz of america that is around. so we have a weird understanding of what constitutes the unpopular or the controversial or the threatened. >> talk to me about what a reimagined concept around free speech looks like, what the framework looks like. are you talking about something

that changes the constitution or just the way we interpret how speech should be expected in this country? >> i think it's important for us to think at any point when talking about reimagining or reinterpreting and the first amendment is not self-executing, it's not self-explanatory. it took over a hundred years for the united states to decide, for the supreme court to decide that this is not just a protection that exists against the federal government, but also exists against state governments and other forms of state-sponsored suppression, so we've always had to engage of this process of interpretation and application. so anyone today who is trying to say, let's think carefully about this and let's talk about whether we're doing it in a way that is just or fair, this is just continuing the project of trying to interpret a document that is not exactly -- it hasn't been handed down to us from the heavens, but is created by men

and applied and practiced by people over history and do a better job of it sometimes. some that's really all that i'm calling for here.fo it's not an amendment to the constitution, because that's a practical, almost a near impossibility, but rather, if we are doing what we do, as lawyers, as scholars, as members of the public, the first amendment belongs to us.en and it belongs to the way that we, as a people want to interpret it. let's do a better job. >> this is just the beginning of a very important conversation. i really recommend people read this ombook, because it really does help ecus understand this.s you and i are going to have a longer conversation at the strand on monday, on broadway in new york. if anybody is in new york and wants to icome to this thing, look toit up and i'll post it o my social media. thank you for this great conversation. mary ann franks is legislative and policy te