detrimental than beneficial to the people

While the First Amendment right is in place to guarantee freedom of speech, there are limitations placed on this amendment in order to protect the people of the United States. A person or establishment has the right to say what they wish, but only information that is not detrimental to the people, or that does not place the country’s security measures at risk are entitled to this protection. Edward Snowden, for example, made a decision to use his First Amendment right to express his concern over the NSA harvesting information of American citizens without their knowledge. The problem is (besides the fact that he stole the information he disclosed) that Snowden is not protected under the First Amendment because the information he disclosed could (and allegedly did) harm the security of the United States. Other things that are not protected by the First Amendment include obscenity, statements that are made to provoke violence, and fabricated statements that are created to intentionally mislead. The government has determined that the protection of these categories of speech is more detrimental than beneficial to the people of the United States. Censorship of objectionable material is compatible with the First Amendment as long as it does not encompass any of the above mentioned stipulations.