[briandear]

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Did congress pass a law I missed? Government communication isn’t a 1st Amendment issue. When you work for any employer, you are subject to the whims of that employer.

[rolph]

actually, governments are severly limited in compelling or interfering with political speech

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act

[rufus_foreman]

Governments are not limited by the Hatch Act, civil service employees are. And the limitations are mainly around elections, so for example under the Hatch Act a civil service employee may not "use his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election", may not "knowingly solicit, accept, or receive a political contribution from any person", may not "run for the nomination or as a candidate for election to a partisan political office", and may not "knowingly solicit or discourage the participation in any political activity" of someone who the civil service employee is interacting with.

[JustExAWS]

The laws are different when you work for the government. A private employee can fire you for something you said a lot easier than the government.

https://www.welcometothejungle.com/en/articles/free-speech-a...

[bragr]

>The laws are different when you work for the government.

Which laws? Because every government job I've come across has pretty strict rules on what you can and cannot say in public, or at least they way in which you have to frame it apart from your job.

[quantified]

This isn't a 1st Amendment issue.