I'm curious to read the decisions by the four justices in the minority which seems to suggest that Americans' first amendment rights are suspended a month before an election.
Extra - From Reason's Hit & Run:
Earlier this week the Supreme Court began dismantling the thoroughly odious John McCain-Russ Feingold "Don't Hurt Politicians' Feelings Censorship Law." What part of the First Amendment's "Congress shall make no law ...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people...to petition the Government for redress of grievances" doesn't McCain and his cowering cohorts on Capitol Hill not understand?"Right on.
3 comments:
I'm also with the Court on this one, but how does the decision jibe with the opposite free speech vote on "Bong Hits" that was announced the same day? The two rulings seem intellectually inconsistent.
Bong Hits ruling was based on educational environment considerations. Proscription of speech by administrators re: promotion of drugs, alcohol, violence. I think same session SCOTUS ruled that an anti-Bush T-shirt IS protected as political speech. On balance, I'm ok with free speech limitations within the school environment, as long as such restrictions are not on political speech. If the banner had said, "Legalize Bong Hits" I'd side with Ginsburg, Stevens and the deeply-disturbing Souter.
Which of course makes no sense. Free speech is like voting or military service now? You receive it at 18?
Oh, that Davey Souter. He's not a tiresomely predictable partisan vote. He tries to identify the merits of a case, rather than basking in the merits of his own mind. He's issued anti-liberal and anti-conservative rulings. How DISTURBING!
Post a Comment