Having undertaken this examination over many months, Freedom House concludes that today’s American is quite free. The United States in 2008 remains a society in which political rights and civil liberties are widely though not universally respected. Challenges to those freedoms by government officials or other actors encounter vigorous and often successful resistance from civil society and the press, the political opposition, and a judiciary that is mindful of its role as a restraint on executive and legislative excess. Indeed, the dynamic, self-correcting nature of American democracy—the resilience of its core institutions and habits even in a time of military conflict—is the most significant finding of Today’s American: How Free?

The study draws three broad conclusions that go to the heart of both the strengths of the American system and the challenges confronting it.

1. The United States has been relatively successful in managing the inevitable tensions of a society characterized by substantial racial, ethnic, and religious diversity. Unlike the European democracies, for instance, America has been a destination for immigrants throughout its history. Indeed, it has been defined by its continually changing demography. The country’s ability to receive and integrate tens of millions of non-Europeans in recent decades is an impressive testament to the flexibility, fairness, and pragmatism of the American system. One might consider the United States to be the world’s first truly globalized nation, given the origins of its people and its increasing economic and communications integration with their many homelands.

Nevertheless, America’s comparative success in creating a multiracial and, in a sense, multinational society should not obscure the very real problems associated with such diversity. Racial minorities and immigrants are central to practically every issue that confronts the country today, including the difficult relationship between African Americans and the criminal justice system, the debate over the role of Muslims in American society, and the recurring controversy over illegal immigrants. Racial and religious differences give rise to demagogues on all sides. Angry arguments about "controlling our borders" and affirmative action are vivid reminders that pluralism makes hard demands on the institutions of free societies. The tensions and debates over the status of minorities and immigrants will remain with the United States long after the current contention over issues like the PATRIOT Act has been put to rest.

2.The restrictions on freedom posed by counterterrorism measures are worrying. This study expresses grave concern about attempts to extend executive authority without the usual congressional and judicial review, extraordinary renditions, mistreatment of those in U.S. custody, and warrantless wiretaps in contravention of the requirements of U.S. law.

However, the controversy surrounding the Bush administration’s counterterrorism policies must be assessed at least in part within the context of the strains on civil liberties in previous times of war. To be sure, the United States should be judged by the standards of the 21st century, and not by those of yesteryear. It is important and heartening to note the extent to which the response of civil liberties advocates has been both crisp and ultimately persuasive with judges, including those presiding in military courts. But it is also worthwhile to acknowledge the great distance our society has traveled in the evolution of its democracy. In 1798, newspaper editors were jailed under the Sedition Act; during the Civil War, habeas corpus privileges were suspended; during World War I, women peaceably picketing at the White House for suffrage were imprisoned for "disrupting the war effort"; during World War II, censorship was imposed and Japanese Americans were placed in internment camps; and in the Vietnam War era, the FBI and CIA investigated thousands of Americans whose patriotism was questioned because of their antiwar opinions. Today, none of these practices would be tolerated, or even seriously considered.

The excesses of these earlier periods of conflict were each addressed and resolved by the normal workings of the American system, though often after some delay. Regarding today’s civil liberties controversies, a process of rethinking and adjustment is already under way as this work goes to print. The executive branch is being challenged by the courts and by Congress, and Congress is being challenged by the voters. Further corrections can be expected in the coming months and years. This is the larger, more important reality that gives Freedom House confidence in the democratic future of the United States. The American democracy responds to transgressions and is constantly reinvigorated.

3. A free press and an independent judiciary continue to be linchpins of the American system and are essential to preserving freedom in our society. The judiciary’s role in repeatedly defending individual rights can be seen throughout this study. The rights of religious and racial minorities, the free speech protections for students and academics, the due process rights of American citizens (and others) detained as enemy combatants, the ability of accused criminals to mount an effective defense, the rights of women to secure equal access to economic opportunity—these are but a few examples of the many aspects of democratic fairness that are regularly addressed by the courts. The judiciary’s function as guardian of minority rights is visible now in the national discussion about the rights of gay men and lesbians to marry, adopt, and inherit. The role of the press as a vital bulwark of freedom appears throughout this study in much the same way, and with respect to many of the same issues. The strength and independence of these two institutions has long been crucial to the protection of American freedoms, and is no less so in the current period of conflict and uncertainty.