Whether the US is great or not is a debate for another day. One great thing is the First Amendment’s guarantee of the right to free speech.
The freedom of speech gives power to the people. The power of dissent. The very nature of free speech is that it protects dissent. After all, every country offers free speech regarding towing the party line. Without dissent, there would be no need for law permitting the freedom of speech.
The right to dissent was unequivocally acknowledged in the 1971 Supreme Court case NY Times v US, in which the federal government tried to prevent the NY Times and the Washington Post from publishing the Pentagon Papers, exposing the US government’s deception concerning the Vietnam War.
In an expedited case before the Supreme Court, the court ruled 6-3 in favor of the Times (and the Washington Post) and declared that “a free press was established to serve the governed, not the governors.”
One of the concurring judges, Hugo Black, argued, “Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government.”
Mahmoud Khalil
With respect to the imprisonment of Mahmoud Khalil, Judge Andrew Napolitano, who has served on the faculty of Seton Hall University School of Law as an adjunct professor of constitutional law (for those who support Trump, you might know that Judge Napolitano was a confidant of Trump during his first administration and was considered by Trump for appointment to the Supreme Court), noted, “He [Khalil] can say whatever he wants. He can stand on a soapbox and say, ‘Hamas is great. Hamas should win.’ That is absolutely protected speech.”
Judge Napolitano noted that he looked at the charging documents in the Khalil case and observed that Khalil has not even been accused of a crime. He stated, “There are no facts in the charging documents; No evidence.”
Judge Napolitano concluded, “Even in this rigged system, the rudimentary principles of due process have to apply. They have to allege something. That’s totalitarianism.”
“To yank him out of his bedroom on the basis of a conclusory statement. It’s an affront on free speech.”
The judge added, “All he did is exercise his natural born right of free speech, which protects everyone whether you are a citizen or a permanent resident of the US.” Later, he noted, “Even if he did pass out literature that said support the Palestinians and commit crimes if you want to in order to support them, even that is protected speech.”
When asked if his rights are negated because it is an immigration matter, Judge Napolitano replied, “None of the immigration laws can trump the First Amendment because free speech is protected—every school child knows that.”
Dangerous precedent
Sadly, many have failed to see the threat to free speech in the government’s actions.
What is tragically ironic is that in his inauguration speech on January 20, 2025, Trump declared, “I stopped all government censorship, and I’ve brought back free speech in America.” Later that day, he signed Executive Order 14149, titled “Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship.”
Aaron Mate of the Grayzone noted that of all people, Trump should understand the need for free speech since he was the target of trumped-up media accusations of being a Russian asset. Mate noted that it is astonishing that “He [Trump] is now weaponizing the government against people whose views you don’t like. It is sad that Trump hasn’t learned from his own witch-hunt case against him.” Mate added, “This is a brazen assault on free speech, and if it is allowed to stand, it sets a very chilling precedent.”
Christian dissent
Expressing dissent is what it means to be a Christian. The very nature of the Gospel is the claim that there is only one true Lord or King. And that King represents a kingdom which stands radically opposed to the kingdoms of the world:
Mark 10:42-43, “Jesus said to them, ‘You know that those who are recognized as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them; and their great men exercise authority over them. But it is not this way among you.’”
Scot McKnight and Cody Matchett have written an excellent new commentary on the book of Revelation titled “Revelation for the Rest of Us: A Prophetic Call to Follow Jesus as a Dissident Disciple.”
Now, Christians must use caution when expressing dissent since the consequences could be severe in some countries. They did, after all, crucify Jesus for claiming to be the King—which, of course, He was.
Some Christians, however, undermine the biblical story, supposing this is not what Jesus meant. After all, they suggest, Jesus’ kingdom is “not of this world” (John 18:36)—as the great—sorry, I am dating myself—Petra song declared.
The problem here is that a “spiritualized” kingdom reflects a pagan view of reality and is not at all what Jesus meant. Jesus’ kingdom is “not of this world” because its origin is divine and not human. That His kingdom is indeed one which directly impacts the kingdoms of the world, that is, He is the world’s true Lord, is fundamental to the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:10). Hence, Jesus affirms to Pilate, “Or My men would have been fighting” (John 18:36).
The essence of the kingdom of God is that power derives from God and not from human affirmations. As a result, the kingdom of God does not operate as the kingdoms of the world, that is, through violence.
That Jesus is the King is unequivocally affirmed by Paul in 1 Cor 15:20-28. Biblically, Christ presently reigns over the kingdoms of the world from heaven through His people, who are empowered by the Spirit. Someday, Christ will consummate His rule and hand over all the world’s kingdoms to the Father (1 Cor 15:24).
For Christians, our sole allegiance is to the kingdom of God. Sure we submit to every ruling authority and even pray for the kings and rulers of the world. At the same time, we are called to practice and advocate for the ethics of the kingdom of God. For those of us in the US, where we have the freedom of speech, it is incumbent upon us to lovingly critique the empire. This includes defending the rights of all persons to exercise their right to free speech whether we agree with them or not.
I would caution against simply accepting the empire’s propaganda. The allegations of condemnation against Khalil are strictly based on the words of a government spokesperson who asserted that Khalil participated in criminal acts. This claim is highly suspect. Judge Napolitano’s affirmation that the charging papers do not contain any allegations or charges suggests these allegations are unfounded.
Furthermore, the fact that the government violated the constitution by detaining a lawful resident with a green card without issuing a charge and that they compounded its violation of the constitution by moving him 1,000 miles from the district in which he committed alleged crimes warrants further suspicion of the government’s accusations against him.
The fact that Khalil is being detained because he spoke against the US’ efforts of financing and arming the genocide in Gaza affirms the concern, which I have written about both here and on my social media feeds, suggests that the US government is intent on obstruction our most basic right, which the US constitution affirms is a divine right, to free speech.
Now, you may disagree with my conclusion. That is fine. I ask that you do some due diligence before you voice your opinions. I encourage you to begin with a posture of suspicion against those in power.
As we discuss in our livestream series on the Book of Revelation, the Beast, and what it means for today, this is how empires work.
Let’s suppose that the government is correct concerning Khalil. Even then, we should speak up when the empire begins detaining a person with a valid green card, which, by many accounts, was shown to the ICE officers at the time of Khalil’s detention. They detained him without a charge, anyway.
We should speak up when the empire violates his constitutional rights to appear before a judge in the district in which he committed the alleged crimes. Even those who believe that Khalil is guilty of a crime should still demand that the government abide by the constitution and give Khalil his right to a trial in the judicial jurisdiction in which he committed said crimes.
When the rights of those who are legally in this country are trampled on, the US becomes dangerously close to becoming a totalitarian state. Extreme? Perhaps. But isn’t it better to use our free speech to defend democracy before it is too late?
As a Christian, I am not overly concerned about the nature of my government. I am happy to live in a democracy. If the country wants to become a totalitarian state, so be it. I will exercise my right to free speech to oppose such. If, however, the majority believe this is best for our country, it is what it is. My allegiance remains to Christ alone.
But as long as we have the legal right to express dissent, we must speak up.
As the Martin Niemoller poem at the exit to the holocaust museum declares,
First, they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
I refuse to put these posts behind a paywall as this hinders the poor from accessing the information. But I can only continue these posts with the support of those of you who can afford to give. So, if you can afford to give $5, $10, $25, or $1 million/month, please do so. You can give a tax-deductible contribution by following this link. Choose “Rob” in the dropdown menu.
Please share this post and let others know about determinetruth.
If you wish to view this blog on your smartphone through the Determinetruth app, download the “tithe.ly church” app and insert “determinetruth” as the name of the church you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, click on the “blog” icon, and it will automatically load.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In