Freedom of speech is freedom from dumb laws that violate the Constitution. It's literally what the text says.

As 1st amendment absolutist as one can be, I don't think "manipulating people" is something that should be protected under free speech. idk, is that a hot take?

/music co-host | Music DAO founder everwave.xyz | ex telco.in founder | writing on web3 & culture https://paragraph.xyz/@alixkun.eth

1/ Reality? 🤷‍♂️ 
Manipulating people in my book is lying to them to achieve an expected result. Maybe deceiving is a better word if you will.

2/No comment about that part. I'm not a constitutionalist, so I wouldn't dare elaborate on what that could look like.

1. How do you define manipulating people? Who is the expert to decide what is correct.

2. We have clear case law and tests for the exceptions. So you're proposing we update those. That requires a constitutional amendment, which seems unlikely. Or SCOTUS to throw out a bunch of 1st Amendment case law.