The First Amendment is one of several foundational pillars that make the United States unique in its almost-unwavering written protection of religion, protest, and most importantly of all, speech.

But like all freedoms, there are exceptions. When it comes to speech, for example, there are categories of expression that fall outside the protections of the First Amendment, including obscenity, child pornography, and speech that incites violence — and it’s the latter that stands as an opportunity for authoritarian, would-be fascists among us to silence their enemies.

According to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), media companies should be held accountable for “incitement of violence.” And by media companies, she means Fox News.

“When it comes to broadcast television, like Fox News, these are subject to federal law, federal regulation in terms of what’s allowed on air and what isn’t,” Ocasio-Cortez told former White House press secretary and now MSNBC host Jen Psaki on Sunday. “And when you look at what Tucker Carlson and some of these other folks on Fox do, it is very, very clearly incitement of violence.”

“Very clearly incitement of violence. And that is the line that, I think, we have to be willing to contend with,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

She is, of course, wrong. Very, very wrong, in fact.

Only speech that incites imminent lawless action falls outside the protection of the First Amendment, with standards becoming more stringent over time. While incitement was measured with the “clear and present danger” standard of 1919’s Schenck v. United States, this was limited by the “imminent lawless action” standard of Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969.

Given this specific definition of “imminent” incitement of lawlessness, it’s important to note that Ocasio-Cortez failed to provide any examples of Tucker Carlson and other Fox News figures inciting such action.

Why? Well, beyond the fact that no objective examples exist, it’s because she doesn’t actually care about incitement of violence.

How can any member of the Democratic Party, let alone a member of its radical fringes, claim to oppose the incitement of violence following the explosion of racialized violence across the country from 2020 onward?

How can we forget that then-House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) called for uprisings, fellow “Squad” member Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) said that “there needs to be unrest in the streets,” and Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) called for Republicans to be harassed in public?

And what about media figures who exist outside of the Fox News bubble?

CNN’s Don Lemon described the “biggest terror threat” in the U.S. as “white men,” while his former co-host Chris Cuomo said , “Show me where it says that protest is supposed to be polite and peaceful.”

Perhaps Cuomo needs to reread the First Amendment? The line “the right of the people peaceably to assemble” might be relevant.

But in reality, they do not care about the First Amendment because they don’t really care about freedom. What they care about is power. Whether speech or violence, they’re willing to use every weapon in their arsenal to achieve this ultimate goal.

Ian Haworth ( @ighaworth ) is the host of Off Limits with Ian Haworth .