 What statement below would Fiss most likely agree with?
What Professor Fiss has to say about it is worth attending to not merely because of his prominence in the field but because his argument is planted in the common assumptive ground of a lot of contemporary academic thought about the bankruptcy of individualism. This is what Fiss means by the "irony" in his title: that true freedom of speech for all requires suppressing the speech of some. Fiss does not avoid it. Fiss' analyses of specific cases are presented against a lightly sketched historical argument.
 He believes in fair speech over free speech.
 Historical laws should be left unchanged.  He believes in equality for all.  He believes in fair speech over free speech.  The U.S. constitution needs a new amendment.