first amendment. they're expressing their religious beliefs. now is the time to make justice a reality for all of god's children. captioning provided by the first amendment center, funded by the freedom forum. welcome to speaking freely, a weekly conversation about free expression, the arts, and america. i'm ken paulson, the executive director of the first amendment center. our guest once described rap as "america's black radio station." if that's the case, we're joined today by the program director of an entire movement. please welcome the founder of public enemy, chuck d. [applause] you're a man of opinions. what i didn't know until reading a bit more about you was that your folks were both activists, that you grew up in a household of opinions. did that shape the way you look at the world? yup, 'cause my parents kind of, like, raised me to be independent and have independent thoughts, not so much as follow my peers, and to challenge information. so, i mean, to be an activist just means that they were conscious of certain facts that were circulating. and in the '60s, they were in their 20s, late 20s, so that was a time where you had a conscious movement where

first amendment. they're expressing their religious beliefs. now is the time to make justice a reality for all of god's children. captioning provided by the first amendment centerelcome to speaking freely, a weekly conversation about free expression, the arts, and america. i'm ken paulson, the executive director of the first amendment center. our guest once described rap as "america's black radio station." if that's the case, we're joined today by the program director of an entire movement. please welcome the founder of public enemy, chuck d. [applause]

center for democracy and electronic -- they are saying the same thing. wait a minute. in the digital world wishes to look at things like the fourth amendment, the firstmendment, freedom of speech. not automatically figure somebody to sit through everything and see if we confine something wrong with it. charles: this is the big question. it t big, too powerful, can stop? have we crossed a rubicon? >> i don't think we have. i know from a public perspective we have not done it. we have not agreed to do it. it is importa that we have this discussion, not only in congress but on shows like yours to say wait a minute. what exactly is being done, how is it being done and to is it being done to. there is another nexus. youook at the economic peace. much of the digital technology evolves around the united states. was in europe a couple of weeks a. the europeans are saying wait a minute. why do business with a u.s. company if we're going to have to worry about data or privacy. we will start shifting business to europe and other markets which then affects us not only from privacy perspective but also a business and economic perspective. charles: i have to tl yo

information center thank you for joining me and thank you for having me now first question if you could talk about the new injection secrecy law and if it threatens the first and eighth amendment in georgia's constitution was a sleeping law passed by georgia that forbids revealing any information about the manufacture of the drugs they're using or who's going. to administer them and maybe even makes it a crime to do so so it's a form of censorship and it also restricts the defendant from being able to challenge it because with no information they have nothing to complain about and it of course prevents the court in the public from knowing as well right now just was the first state to prohibit the execution of the mentally retarded a term that they still years and one nine hundred eighty six which laid the groundwork for the two thousand and three supreme court decision outline the execution of people who suffer from mental illness says now why do you think georgia is moving forward with this execution today which we're getting a second that they actually didn't move forward today as execution all of this despite the state throwing it at legal well they hold that he is not ment

amendment which makes four very commonsense reforms. first, this amendment protects children with autism and other disabilities. according to the centers for disease control, an astounding one in 88 children and one in 54 boys across the united states are on the autism spectrum. my amendment would simply ensure that education plans do not deny opportunity to these students with autism or other disabilities. second, this would amend to protect children from abusive seclusion and restraint policies. a shocking 41 states have verify red ports of any appropriate -- of inappropriate seclusion and restraints in their schools. the government accountability office has documented hundreds of allegations of such abuse against students including students with disabilities. troubling reports have emerged of students pinned to the ground, face down. students who have been confined in car board boxes, and students who have been literally duct taped to chairs. as a result, some students have even die. my amendment would put in place minimum safety standards to prevent abusive se clues -- seclusion and restraint in school. third, this amendment would

first amendment legal precedent for public access to the court documents, so what she would do , mile athese very long minute recitations of the minutes into the record and deprive us of the media operations centerso we had to scribble these things down and our notebook. and this is not just the trial of brown demanding. we are talking about setting legal precedent for the future of national security reporting and whistleblowers. also beyond that, simply people using the internet, communicating in legally protected speech. the government is asserting in this case that, essentially, the enemy uses the internet, so if you publish intelligence, a the enemy with what is classified as intelligence, that is the definition. brought up on be the charge of aiding the enemy. that wery important should have had access to these it leans to a and record of her being deferential to t government and do whatever they can to manage the trial and the public perception about it. >> the judge is going to move out of her position after this. report from to a the washington post, she has been given an appellate judge job in the higher court, which i find extraordinary. i do not know if it is illegal, but it is intere

everybody on the right and to the center right of the political spectrum has been so quick to throw out being willing to -- our constitutional rights, the first amendmenteadly than any terrorist organization. the russians. we never threw out the fourth and first amendment for them. we don't know that the terrorists have the ability to -- we did know that the russians could nuke every american city. and had the ability and were tried of it. we didn't degrade ourselves by destroying the constitution under the bus just for the russians. why are we doing it for the terrorists. i don't know if snowden is a real traitor or not but why are we -- why are we beating ourselves up for an enemy that is really lesser than the russians? >> stephanie: i get your point. why are we hitting ourselves? >> because we do that as well as a nation. >> stephanie: elvis in madison, wisconsin. >> caller: hey. i think we should line up a little bit about the nsa. serious stuff. it is personal. when the nsa says that we're -- very concerned about letting out the secrets to the enemy by the enemy, they just mean jim ward. >> stephanie: of course. exactly. thank you for that. jan i

first amendment. in a way that the normal bank robbery doesn't. so it's a riskier area, but just to make sure you got the alignment between how people are operating the federal government in the fusion centers and the jttf so it's consistent with a maximum authority of giving them under the law. there's a last piece year, congressman, which is after they do that you need to give them top cover. because i sat in this chair when it was an official of the u.s. government and i was getting yelled at by people in your cities about how dare you watch list my constituent. my constituent never did anything, and every time he a stops them at the airport, and three months later after the christmas day bombing, the very same people, not suggesting members of this committee, were saying how dare you, mr. leiter, why aren't there more people on the no-fly list? everyone should be on the no-fly list. so you have to set that bar, make sure that the executive branch is only that part to its fullest, and then be honest after the fact that people in executive branch are doing really hard jobs, get it with your blessing as long as they are doing what you're explicit about allowing them to do. >> i think you'r