Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
Background
First of all, you have to know who accused Hughes and of what. Hughes was one of the literary figures of the Harlem Renaissance.
As a poet, he saw his job, I would guess, as a trumpeter pointing out what was wrong with America. In that regard he was a fore runner to Martin Luther King. He (Hughes) did not preach violence. He merely testified before the Senate un-american activities Committee. His poetry came out when he tried to describe himself to lead council. Hughes was asked if he was influenced by the Communist party.
Hughes said yes, but his mind was like a sponge -- it absorbed material from everything he encountered. This was not what lead council was looking for. Like most lawyers, he was looking for a black and white answer and he wasn't getting it.
One of the blackest marks against America was the House of Unamerican activities. It flew in the face of everything the 1st Amendment stood for. So yes, Hughes had a perfect right to speak. He was not like Malcolm X or any of the other violent leaders of Civil Rights. He was a poet seeking answers. When has that become unamerican?