Vile and defamatory speech consists of unreasonable and unfounded malicious attacks on a person that does not deserve public scrutiny due to his career affiliation. Chief Justice Hughes believed that the First Amendment had to be construed and that newspapers must not be restrained as long as they perform their expected function in keeping a critical eye on public officials. It is, therefore, necessary and duty-bound for the Saturday Press to keep alive the important issues about the locality or even a federal state in general alive and burning in order to catch the attention as well as fuel the right and justified action among those who have sworn to uplift and protect the welfare of the taxpayers.
It is, therefore, questionable to protect vile and defamatory speech aimed properly at those who deserve it. For law enforcement and the courts, protection of vile and defamatory speech could be a rightful duty to protect the privacy and concerns of citizens of a given locality or area. However, for publishers, writers, news reporters, editors, and broadcasters, vile and defamatory speech for a limited few may not be the same case. It is but proper to air the concerns of people, especially when issues involved governance and safety of the public or voters and taxpayers. The government, with its powers practiced by its officials, cannot and should not protect speech aimed at its officials as “gagging” freedom of speech is a constitutional violation, specifically, the First Amendment that safeguards the rights of peoples to making laws that prohibit the free exercise of religion, laws that infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to assemble peaceably, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
