Thus HUD officials explained in 1994 that while yes, of course, the First Amendment was important, equally important was the Fair Housing Act, which prohibits housing bias against an ever-expanding pool of protected classes. This ostensible parity between the statute and the Constitution quickly became a hierarchy, with the bias law easily trumping the First Amendment. As the government's vast antidiscrimination force expands, so does the definition of discrimination. That is, they made an argument based on facts. Under this logic, political speech enjoys the protection of the Constitution only so long as it fails to persuade anyone.
Bias hounds in government, the media and education see the American people as profoundly bigoted.
Campus thought police have long employed similar tactics, charging students who publicize their school's preferential admissions policies with civil rights violations. Likewise, housing and poverty advocates routinely intimidate opponents with the charge that opposition to neighborhood social service facilities violates fair-housing laws. It has also threatened sanctions against local governments that seek to confine homeless shelters to commercial or industrial areas. The Clinton administration proudly points to large increases in rights-enforcement budgets across the federal bureaucracy, including HUD's, as proof of its commitment to the antibias crusade. The administration's zeal to correct the sins of a small-minded populace should worry anyone who cares about constitutional liberties.