My question is prompted by Senator Josh Hawley, who just had a book contract cancelled by Simon and Schuster for his part in the Wednesday’s disaster. The book publisher said it could not “support Senator Hawley after his role in what became a dangerous threat to our democracy and freedom.” In response, Hawley went to Twitter:
On Twitter, Sen. Hawley called Simon & Schuster’s decision “Orwellian” and “a direct assault on the First Amendment,” saying his work representing his constituents was redefined by the publisher as sedition.
Simon & Schuster may be wrong to cancel Hawley’s book deal – as a matter of fact, that’s where I lean right now – but I was not aware that a book publisher refusing to publish someone was a violation of the first amendment of the Constitution. Unless Simon & Schuster has become a part of Congress without any of us knowing it, then I don’t think this touches the first amendment at all.
This is the same Senator, mind you, who is leading an assault on the first amendment in his pointless jihad against “big tech.”
Senator Hawley has been helpful in at least one regard – he’s helping reduce the field of candidates I will have to consider supporting in 2024. His fellow Senator from the great state of Texas has also been useful this way.
Letters from Cato 