������Ƶ

hearings for justice nominee are fast approaching.

It’s time to consider some key questions about speech rights the senators should ask during the constitutionally mandated .

These hearings often are contentious. That was the case for in the early 1990s. And they surely won’t be a cakewalk this time, given Democratic anger over Republican inaction on , former President Barack Obama’s nominee to replace Justice , who in February 2016.

The First Amendment questions I’d pose to Gorsuch are critical because the man who nominated him, , bashes the press as “” yet no one loves the First Amendment more than he.

An obvious question for Judge Gorsuch is his view of the court’s 2010 ruling in . That 5-4  divided sharply along perceived partisan lines. It affected the speech rights of corporations and unions in funding political ads shortly before elections. Committee Democrats no doubt will grill Gorsuch about Citizens United.

As the director of the at the University of Florida, I would like to suggest at least three other timely and vital questions he should be asked about speech rights – but that I doubt he will face.

Capturing Cops On Camera

The first question to Gorsuch involves an issue the Supreme Court has never tackled – does the First Amendment protect a person’s right to record police officers doing their jobs in public places?

It’s a vital question in light of incidents such as the April 2015 shooting in the back of unarmed African-American by white police officer Michael Slager in South Carolina. A video of it was captured on a smartphone by barber while walking to work. It was key evidence in Slager’s murder trial – which ended with a .

Without guidance from the Supreme Court about recording cops in public venues, lower courts have had to sort it out for themselves.

Just last month, the concluded in that “First Amendment principles, controlling authority, and persuasive precedent demonstrate that a First Amendment right to record the police does exist, subject only to reasonable time, place and manner restrictions.” That’s a positive step in terms of creating a constitutional right to record cops within the Fifth Circuit, which includes Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. But just what constitutes a “reasonable” restriction is extremely vague and problematic, especially because judges defer to officers’ judgments.

Worse still, haven’t even recognized any First Amendment right to record police.

In the case of , now under review by the , a federal judge there is no First Amendment right to film police in public spaces unless the person recording does so with the intent of police actions. In brief, there is no First Amendment right to neutrally record police as a bystander or journalist in Philadelphia.

Gorsuch thus should be asked: “Do citizens have a First Amendment right to record police doing their jobs in public places and, if there is such a right, what – if any – are the specific limits on that right?”

Protesting In Public

Trump’s presidency ushers in a new era of confrontational political activism. and are common, with some . Berkeley, California – home of the 1960s free speech movement – saw when pro- and anti-Trump individuals clashed.

Gorsuch should be questioned about the First Amendment and the limits on that right affecting political demonstrations on public streets, sidewalks and parks. The Supreme Court privileges such “” for picketing and protests, and it carefully reviews any restrictions imposed there on speech and assembly. Would Gorsuch follow that tradition of protection?

Disturbingly, The New York Times earlier this month that lawmakers in more than 15 states are considering bills that would curb, to varying degrees, the right to protest. , such as , do so by requiring that a special event permit be obtained before any protest on a street, thus stifling spontaneous demonstrations that might occur after a controversial executive order or a startling jury verdict.

Requiring the government to grant a permit before one can protest constitutes a on speech. Prior restraints, the Supreme Court has repeatedly found, are .

Gorsuch thus should be asked: “What, if any, limits are there on the First Amendment right to engage in political speech in public spaces, including streets, sidewalks and parks?”

The Right To Offend

Finally, I’d ask Gorsuch for his views about the First Amendment . It’s an important topic today for three reasons.

First, protesters may use offensive language to capture attention and show the passion behind their views. The Supreme Court traditionally protects offensive political speech, as it famously did in 1971 in . There it ruled in favor of First Amendment right to wear a jacket with the words “F— the Draft” in a Los Angeles courthouse hallway.

Second, some believe there’s a pall of political correctness in society, particularly . Some students may be deterred from using certain language or expressing particular viewpoints for fear they will offend others and thus be punished.

Third, the Supreme Court is set to rule in the coming months in a case called . It centers on the power of the to deny an Asian-American band called trademark registration over that name because it allegedly disparages Asians. The court heard in the case in January.

I’d thus ask Gorsuch: “When does offensive expression — in particular, offensive speech on political and social issues — lose protection under the First Amendment?”

Gorsuch already has to the Judiciary Committee on some issues, but not on the questions raised here. These topics — filming cops in public, protesting on streets and sidewalks, and using offensive language — seem especially relevant in a turbulent Trump era.

This article was originally published on . Read the .