MICHAEL BARONE: Actually, Economist, the First Amendment does give people ‘a free pass to go round saying hateful things’.

The Economist’s writers and editors are mostly citizens of the United Kingdom, which doesn’t have a First Amendment, but as members of the press — and employees of a publication which has more readers in the United States than in Britain — they ought to be aware of American First Amendment law. It’s pretty astonishing and dismaying that with the use of the verb “points out” they indicate a complacent acceptance of the notion that speech repugnant to some people may be prohibited and with the phrase “self-styled defenders of the First Amendment” they suggest disapproval of those seeking to uphold the right of free speech. It’s particularly odd since the web version links to another Economist article decrying the new Polish government’s “purging the country’s public media.”

Why is it acceptable for a state university to prohibit free speech while it is unacceptable, or at least disreputable, for a government to shape the content of government-subsidized media? Does The Economist believe that freedom of speech only applies to ideas it approves of?

Actually, it’s even more disturbing that an American law professor would say what the Economist is agreeing with.