As the cries of “Je Suis Charlie” erupted in France following the 2015 terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo in Paris, France, the world echoed questions regarding the interpretation of freedom, the limitations of rights, and the roles placed to guard those targeted when freedoms are exercised (A Nation). Nevertheless, the attack sparked a rise in political polarization which tightened tensions between the people of France as the country divided ideologically while attempting to answer the difficult question, “what is free speech?”
Gaining insight from American politics, whose constitution was heavily influenced by French political values of freedom and liberty, the First Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees its people the right to express their opinions and beliefs through writing, demonstrations, and other forms of expression without government restraint unless the direct (words) and symbolic (actions) conflict with federal law (“What Does”). From a legal standpoint, the First Amendment of the …show more content…
The interpretation validates that the government cannot advance nor inhibit religion and insures that no law may impose particular burdens on religious institutions. Furthermore, the government is to refrain from protecting symbolic speech (i.e. burning the American flag) unless the symbolic speech coveys an illegal act through the political message (i.e. burning a draft card is illegal while flag burning is considered protected speech in the United States unless it