Of course freedom of speech is protected.  As with all freedoms it is not cake once baked but a flowing stream where the banks must always be worked with to keep the flowing free. \n\nTo restate the obvious:\n\nCongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.  - First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.\n\nThis words as stated are clear and concise, but they are not cast in concrete with no maintenance need.  Rather, they are a fertile bed which needs constant care of weeding and fertilizing.  The court is one type of weeding . . . . \n\n“The main purpose of constitutional provisions like the First Amendment was said to be, to prevent all such previous restraints upon publications as had been practiced by other governments, and they do not prevent the subsequent punishment of such as may be deemed contrary to the public welfare.”\n\nre: Patterson v. Colorado [1907].\n\nJustice Holmes expanded when he opined in Schenck v. United States [1919] “It well may be that the prohibition of laws abridging the freedom of speech is not confined to previous restraints . . . . But the character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done.  (Then he uttered that most famous phrase)  The most Stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic.”\n\nThe point is the that the courts have altered  and refined our view of this amendment (not the freedom).\n\nSo too is lobbying (a form of petitioning) a tool you can use to ensure that your perspective of this amendment (vis-à-vis the individual right of freedom of speech) is given worthy attention.\n\nFreedom of speech is real and protected, but the question is, will you (any you) work to ensure it stays protected?.