No one wants their email hacked into - especially a political candidate. Yet, in 2008 when Sarah Palin was running for Vice President, her email was hacked and the information was leaked onto WikiLeaks; a site specifically designed for important government leaked documents. Due to this event, government officials gave serious thought into creating stricter privacy laws. Many Americans were outraged at the hackers for various reasons, though many also argued that stricter laws would be a breach of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is a right given in the First Amendment but excludes obscenity, defamation, as well as words that rouse fighting and rioting, though criticism of the government is allowed. However, with the new technology invented in the last couple of decades, such as email and chat, freedom of speech is getting more difficult to interpret.

In a recent case last month, an email user was criticizing a resort; upon seeing the comment, the resort wanted to file a libel case charging the email user. When officially ruled, the New York court decided that due to the First Amendment right, the person was able to express their opinion without feeling as if they were breaking the law. If the expression in an email is an opinion it is alleged that it is ok to express the thought. Yet, if it is cited that if the expression is not a verifiable fact and are words that would cause a panic or defamation, then it is an unlawful means of freedom of speech. One source rightly reminds the public that emails can be forwarded, so it is important to be conscious of the words that are being written; it is also important not to write words that would offend the recipient.

There is a group called The American Civil Liberties Union which states that the First Amendment also protects the freedom of the press, the freedom of speech, and the right to petition an assembly. Along with this they also cite that their agenda is to expand First Amendment freedoms. They think that it is important that even though technology in the U.S. has and still is evolving, that Americans still retain their freedoms entitled to them by the First Amendment. Recently, ACLUA filed a suit against the president of a college when he ordered that professors could not talk to students without first asking for consent through a clearance. This group has participated in many different suits in their pursuit of what they believe is interpreted in the First Amendment.

USA Today reports that while we may have freedom of speech with politicians, this does not necessarily apply in the workplace. This same source reports that even though there are restrictions on freedom of speech in the workplace, it is usually placed purposely to stop unbecoming or disruptive behavior. In their piece, USA Today continually alleges that freedom of speech restrictions are due to the promotion of ethical behaviors. They also report that a modern American conflict that has caused confusion is if First Amendment rights will challenge other amendments and privileges.

They also reported that there are some Americans who have been concerned about the boundaries of opinion and professional facts in some occupations; they have expressed concern to know where opinion and fact are separated in professional opinions. Recently, three doctors filed a suit in the state of Florida in which they believed their First Amendment rights were being threatened. Their lawyer first alleged that the doctors expressed that their speech to their patients could not be through a "government filtered" plan. Secondly their lawyer reported that it was part of their job to provide their patients with information that would provide them of their professional opinions. Regardless, however, of where you stand on the issue of Freedom of Speech, it is clear that as technology gets more advanced, the topic will be conversed about heavily and Americans will redefine and assess their First Amendment rights.