In a column published on 9/24 on the front page of the Daily Business Review, Family Law Attorney Rebecca Palmer discusses how comedy can be used to question the status quo – especially in the political arena. While the First Amendment safeguards freedom of speech, critiques against government officials, policies, and institutions can garner significant consequences.

For instance, Palmer notes, “After Kimmel made comments that received backlash from political figures, his show was pulled off the air by several network affiliates. The public outcry and unified support from fellow comedians created a powerful counter-pressure that led to his return, demonstrating that public advocacy and the resilience of an audience can sometimes succeed against corporate and political forces.”

Nowadays, comedians are known to and even expected to ridicule a person, entity, or concept. The 1988 case of Hustler Magazine v. Falwell has provided protection for comedians, ruling that public figures cannot claim emotional distress simply because they’ve been offended.

“That protection matters now more than ever, because a truly free and democratic society cannot function without the ability to question, mock, and criticize those in power,” said Palmer. “Comedy often serves as the last line of resistance—the jester who dares to mock the king when no one else will. Jokes about a president’s tweets, a senator’s hypocrisy, or a flawed policy are not just entertainment; they’re acts of civic engagement.”

Read the story in full; click here (subscriber-based).