Joel Cohen and Gerald Lefcourt are old friends with whom I generally agree legally and politically. But their argument in defense of protesting in front of the homes of Supreme Court Justices is dangerous to the First Amendment and must be rejected. They argue that "morality … has nothing whatsoever to do with this," and that condemning immoral protests while defending the constitutional rights of immoral protestors to do immoral things "undercuts the right to protest." They have it exactly backwards. Their view would limit constitutionally protected speech which they find morally acceptable. But the First Amendment fully protects immoral speech as much as it does moral speech—perhaps even more so because immoral speech is more likely to be censored.