A panel discussing the First Amendment agreed that a fear of speaking freely has been cast on the citizens of the United States.

A student asked the panelists’ opinions on what the biggest violation of the First Amendment has been. All panelists concluded that the biggest violation was creating a fear to speak candidly and exercise the freedom of speech.

Dave Saldana, adjunct associate professor of journalism and communication, said “the things that you listen to, watch and read are all protected by the First Amendment.”

In honor of the Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication’s fourth annual First Amendment Day, advocates for the First Amendment gathered in Room 2432 of the Food Science Building to discuss the effects 9/11 has had on the First Amendment.

Saldana, who moderated the panel, began the discussion by explaining the importance of the First Amendment. After Saldana’s introduction, each panelist was given a time to discuss their thoughts on the First Amendment and its application to the world since the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001.

Gene Choo, senior producer for NBC News, said he was a reporter stationed in Afghanistan during the terrorist attacks. Although his right to freedom of speech was in no way limited by the First Amendment, he said the public had little desire to hear about how the government was conducting itself overseas.

Choo said the First Amendment is a two-way street and that “the public should look at other sources of information to educate themselves on current events.”

Kevin Bankston, senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the U.S. government began implementing domestic spying after 9/11. Bankston said the very nature of the concept undermines the idea of a free society, because “the First Amendment protects the ability to speak anonymously.”

The government implemented “punitive tactics that chill dissent in addition to privacy violations carried out through legislation such as the PATRIOT Act,” said Heidi Boghosian, executive director of the National Lawyers Guild.

“Since 1999, police have unleashed a torrent of unlethal weapons against peaceful protesters,” she said.

Boghosian said that, in addition to using force, police have begun monitoring protesters to make sure individuals don’t hold up anti-Bush signs.

Boghosian said the acts performed by the government place unnecessary limits on the freedom of speech and have created a stigma against protesters, even though they are using peaceful tactics to promote change.

Peter Erlinder, professor of constitutional and criminal law at William Mitchell College, agreed with Boghosian.

“There would be no progression if there were no free speech,” Erlinder said.