Abstract An oft-cited argument for the speech rights guaranteed in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution is that free trade in the metaphorical marketplace of ideas is a route toward truth. That is, competition in the market should lead to the success of the best ideas and the demise of falsehoods. But this metaphorical marketplace of ideas coexists with a literal marketplace of ideas in which communications professionals provide the speech and assemble the audiences that clients pay for. The literal marketplace is an arena in which those who pay pursue advantages in shaping communications in their own favor, not an arena structured to support the pursuit of an objective truth. The clash between the metaphorical and literal marketplaces of ideas bears importantly on first amendment jurisprudence. I apply this clashing marketplaces framework to two important first amendment cases of the past decade, Citizens United and Janus.

中文翻译：

---

质疑思想市场的类比，解释第一修正案

摘要 美国宪法第一修正案保障言论权的一个经常被引用的论点是，思想隐喻市场中的自由贸易是通向真理的途径。也就是说，市场竞争应该导致最好的想法的成功和虚假的消亡。但是，这个比喻性的想法市场与一个字面的想法市场共存，在这个市场中，通信专业人员提供演讲并聚集客户付费的受众。真正的市场是一个舞台，在这个舞台上，那些付费的人在塑造有利于自己的交流方面追求优势，而不是一个旨在支持追求客观真理的舞台。思想的隐喻市场和字面市场之间的冲突对第一修正案的法理学具有重要意义。