News – Politics – Opinion – Podcasts
It made me rather sad to watch this video. These young’uns not understanding the cost that is behind their Right to say what they want. I cringed when I heard how easily they’d be willing to give it up – emotion over reasoning:
One of the candidates in the Republican primary for US Senate has recently surprised most liberty-loving citizens of New Hampshire by supposedly supporting an amendment to the First Amendment of the US Constitution to overturn the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the well-known Citizens United case!
I don’t care if it is someone on the Left that is a Liberal or on the Right that is a Conservative. All I care about is that their PASSION makes them the BEST defender of our First Amendment Rights in the State. The “why” will come later.
When the Supreme Court won’t back your unconstitutional Statist speech suppression antics what is a political party to do? Amend the First Amendment. That’s the plan according to US Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Dick Durbin (D-IL), and Tom Udall (D- NM).
Here’s a concept for you. A “plaintiff claiming an unconstitutional establishment of religion must demonstrate that he was actually coerced by government conduct that shares the characteristics of an establishment as understood at the founding.”
The California Democrat Party Convention is over, but there’s still plenty of fun to be had. Take this nugget. Resolution 19-05.94. Dems think the First Amendment is Critical, but not when it comes to hate speech.
This: This obviously is viewpoint discrimination because, to show you one example, this Leftist troll account is not blocked: Just as New Hampshire Democrats do not really believe in the Second Amendment, they do not believe in the First Amendment. I am sure that many GOP State Reps regularly read Granite Grok. It will be … Read more
“Don’t wear the Button! Don’t wear the beads” Funny, the last time I was there, I didn’t see a rack in the NH House cloakroom labeled “Hang your First Amendment Rights here.” Yet, we just saw another backhanded Democrat call for “civility” among the NH House members (by NH Rep Douglas Levy:Anti-Constitutionalist, Anti -First Amendment … Read more
Texas passed a law meant to address abuse (let’s call it bullying) in the digital age. But as written the law can be interpreted to limit the ability of citizens to criticize government officials. Another overstep, another opportunity to learn something, just don’t rely on the court (not that you should) to do the teaching. … Read more
Ken White at Popehat has a detailed breakdown of important decisions written by longtime circuit court judge Brett Kavanaugh. The point being, not to advocate but to explore for the purpose of summarizing where a Justice Kavanaugh is likely to come down on future First Amendment cases. I found them all interesting but one, in particular, caught my attention and … Read more
Boom! For these reasons, States and public-sector unions may no longer extract agency fees from nonconsenting employees. The First Amendment is violated when money is taken from nonconsenting employees for a public-sector union; employees must choose to support the union before anything is taken from them. Accordingly, neither an agency fee nor any other form … Read more
Background: Jonathan Baird works for the Social Security Administration, Dan Williams is a government teacher. Both work in union dominated workplaces; my opinion stems from that and that both of them get the new NFL policy wrong from different viewpoints. Mine? The owners own the teams – they can make policies that their employees have … Read more
Eugene Volokh is writing a series of articles on Free Speech and freedom of the press over at Reason. In this installment, he looks at exceptions afforded to a special class of corporate ‘speakers’ the professional press. Under any sensible accounting scheme, an editorial supporting a candidate would cost a lot in labor costs and the … Read more
Freelance writer, pro-life activist Ellen Kolb joins me to discuss compelled speech and the case of NIFLA v Becerra which challenges a California Law the forces pro-life clinics to advertise state-funded abortion services. Follow this program on TuneIn Also Available on Google Play
Freelance writer, pro-life activist Ellen Kolb joins me to discuss compelled speech and the case of NIFLA v Becerra which challenges a California Law the forces pro-life clinics to advertise state-funded abortion services. Visit the original blog post for more ways to listen.
This is interesting, and not just because the ruling came out of a court in California. The state charged a baker with breaking the law because they refused to make a cake for a same-sex couple. The court has denied the State’s motion for preliminary injunction in favor of the baker, Cathy Miller. There’s a good … Read more
The left is keen to suppress speech they oppose in any way they can, and the politicization of science and climate has played a vital part in this effort.
Several ideas, several positions all wrapped into a single video by Star Parker (a black conservative women) who doesn’t care who she ticks off. (H/T: IJR)
The issue of filming the police in the course of public duties is one near and dear to many hearts here in New Hampshire. So this decision from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (Fields v. City of Philadelphia) is worth visiting. This case involves retaliation. Richard Fields and Amanda Geraci attempted to record Philadelphia … Read more
Grab your ‘shovels’ and mount your “plows” ladies and gentleman because it’s time to move some snowflakes. The Supreme Court has unanimously confirmed that there is no hate Speech exception to the first amendment. Justice Kennedy writing for four justices said, A law found to discriminate based on viewpoint is an “egregious form of content … Read more