"The freedom of speech has its origins in our humanity. It is a natural right. It exists in the absence of government. By the exercise of normal human reasoning, all rational people are drawn to exercise this freedom. Madison understood this. He could have written, "Congress shall grant freedom of speech." He did not because that freedom is not Congress' to grant or to abridge."
"What if the hush money agreement Daniels signed — and the president did not — is valid? Could that trigger prior restraint? In a word: no. The Madisonian values underpinning the freedom of speech, as articulated consistently by the Supreme Court, will prevail. Anything short of that would prefer government censorship over personal choices in matters of speech, a preference the First Amendment profoundly rejects."
Read the brief article at; http://www.judgenap.com/post/president-trump-and-the-freedom-of-speech
As I read this, Judge Napolitano is saying the agreement Daniels signed does not restrict her freedom of speech (even though that was the intent of the agreement). So I ask, can conditions in a labor contract limit freedom of speech? Can any words on paper restrict freedom of speech? Even if signed by both parties? If the answer is no, can words on paper restrict any inalienable freedoms? In short, is it possible to voluntarily sign away the freedoms each of us were born with?