Interesting First Amendment Case: Politician sued by activist

A Colorado State Rep obtained a protective order against a political activist.  A court later refused to make it permanent.  The activist filed a First Amendment lawsuit.  If the facts are as alleged, it looks like we have another self-righteous politician with little or no respect for the First Amendment.

Ideology drives Supreme Court First Amendment decisons

This new study by respected researchers suggests that Supreme Court Justices tend to support the First Amendment more when the speaker's views are consistent with the Justice's ideological leanings. The study suggests that the Court's conservatives are more guilty than the liberals.  Like many court watchers, these researchers and this blogger contend that a Justice's ideology (irrespective of whether the Justice leans left or right) drives their decisions in "hot button" cases more often than the facts, precedents, etc.  I would be nice to have a few more "Justices" on the Court and a few less ideologues of any stripe.

Another First Amendment & campaign contribution decision.

In a 5-4 decision, McCutcheon v. F.E.C.,  applying the rationale of the controversial Citizen's United decision, the Court voided all maximum limits on  campaign contributions.  As in the Citizens United decision, the  liberals voted in favor of the legislation and against the First Amendment.  The conservatives and Kennedy voted in favor of the Amendment and against the legislation.  IMHO, this is a good decision consistent with the goals of the First Amendment.  Expect the liberals and Obama to howl long and loud.

Right-wingers attack First Amendment in SC

Most of my critiques are of the Left as they generally dominate higher education, the White House and the Senate.  Here the legislature is poised to move against universities that include LGBT materials in their readings. Yes, there is left-wing ideological indoctrination going on in many classrooms, but this is not the solution. It is disgraceful that legislators would even consider this bill.

Obamacare back to Supreme Court

The Supreme Court will consider whether employers who religiously oppose it can be required by Obamacare to cover forms of medicines and devices (contraceptives) that can  terminate pregnancy.  The company is run by a Mennonite family.  Federal appeals courts are split on the issue which involves a number of sub-issues, including the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Free exercise of religion, rights of corporation, etc.

More left-wing authoritarianism--warranltess gun inspections

Nothing brings left-wing authoritarians out of the closet quicker than "guns." and the Second Amendment.  Latest example of Fourth Amendment insanity aimed at gun owners.  Unfortunately, for this country, we also have lots of right-wing authoritarians, e.g. when it comes to certain aspects of the First Amendment, privacy  rights, etc. To elaborate on older quotes:  Eternal vigilance against both the Left and Right is the price of liberty; The road to authoritarian government is paved with good intentions;  Power corrupts--more power means more corruption.

California College Forbids Passing Out Constitutions...On Constitution Day

"In a stunning illustration of the attitude taken towards free speech by too many colleges across the United States, Modesto Junior College in California told a student that he could not pass out copies of the United States Constitution outside the student center on September 17, 2013—Constitution Day. Captured on video, college police and administrators demanded that Robert Van Tuinen stop passing out Constitution pamphlets and told him that he would only be allowed to pass them out in the college’s tiny free speech zone, and only after scheduling it several days or weeks ahead of time. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has written to Modesto, demanding that the college rescind this policy immediately."    “Worse, FIRE’s research shows that Modesto Junior College is hardly alone in its fear of free speech. In fact, one in six of America’s 400 largest and most prestigious colleges have ‘free speech zones’ limiting where speech can take place. This video brings to life the deeply depressing reality of the climate for free speech on campus.”Source FIRE  Welcome to left-wing higher ed in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

3 Important Upcoming Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court has already decided on some of the cases it will tentatively hear when its term starts early next month. Three important ones, involving the First and Fourth Amendments are discussed here.

Book Review: Jeffrey Toobin's "The Oath."

I am a long-time Supreme Court watcher and analyst and have taught courses on the Court and constitutional issues (e.g. Fourth Amendment, Second Amendment).  I eagerly took up this book.

The book “The Oath,” by Jeffery Toobin, is subtitled “the Obama White House and the  Supreme Court.” 

As the subtitle suggests, this book is primarily about the struggle between  our most liberal President ever, and the conservative faction on the Court, and the struggle between the liberal and conservative factions on the Court.  One faction is the four conservatives on the Court (Scalia, Alito, Thomas and Roberts) who are sometimes joined by Justice Kennedy, who is the Court’s most frequent swing vote.  The liberal faction is Ginsburg, Kagan, Sotomayor and Breyer.  Toobin provides an inside look at both the White House and the Court.  This review will cover only selected points.

Obama has appointed two Justices, both female (Sotomayor and Kagan), and, for the first time the Court has three females, all of whom vote in a liberal direction.  Like all recent  Presidents, Obama sought appointees who share his ideology.  His appointees have not disappointed him.

In terms of qualifications and background, Kagan’s is a very questionable choice.  Kagan had not practiced law  in two decades before being appointed Obama’s Solicitor General.  She had never had a case before the Court.   She had never been a judge anywhere.  She, unlike most recent Justices, had never clerked for a U.S. Supreme Court Justice. Prior to becoming Solicitor General, she had never argued a case in any courtroom.  Her main claim to fame was that she was the first female Dean of Harvard Law School.  Obama wanted her on the Court and his only option was to name her Solicitor General so that she would have at least some minimal qualifications.  Even this appointment was a reach.  Solicitor General frequently had long records of litigation and were active in constitutional litigation (e.g.  Johnson’s appointee Thurgood Marshall).  As has become the case recently with most nominees, Kagan danced around the questions, dodged frequently and was a vague as possible in her confirmation hearing.  In spite of her minimalist qualifications, the Democratic majority in the Senate assured her confirmation.

The book discusses the most controversial cases that came before it, including D.C. v Heller (Second Amendment gives right to individuals), McDonald v. Chicago (Second Amendment applies against the states) Citizens United (First Amendment invalidates portions of “campaign reform” legislation) NFIB v. Sebelius (upholding Obamacare).  Toobin takes the liberal position in all these cases.  Rather than celebrating the strengthening of Constitutional vales and the Bill of Rights in these decisions, Toobin bad-mouths them.   Liberal hypocrisy appears to be at work.    When the liberals lose we generally see accusations of ignoring precedent, ignoring the Constitution, blatant policy- making, etc.   When the liberals win, we generally get praise for the decision.

It is clear to Toobin who are the “bad guys,” on the Court, the four conservatives and Kennedy.  Additional bad guys are the NRA, powerful corporations and the Tea Party.  Obama ‘s policies and the Constitution are often portrayed as the victims of the conservatives on the Court.   Anyone looking for a balanced, sophisticated treatment of the decisions and the Justices will be sadly disappointed.  However, the book is informative about the Court, some of its history, Justices, important cases, etc.  It provides interesting insight into the members of the Court and their interactions.  With these caveats, I’d recommend this book for light reading.

 

Big First Amendment Victory for University Professors (and taxpayers and students)

“In a victory for free speech on campus, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a ruling  (Demers v. Austin)  yesterday addressing a question raised but not answered by the Supreme Court of the United States in Garcetti v. Ceballos (2006): whether the First Amendment protects public college faculty members’ speech “related to scholarship or teaching,” despite the Court’s holding in Garcetti that public employees may be disciplined for “speech made pursuant to the employee’s official duties.” Writing for a unanimous Ninth Circuit panel in yesterday’s opinion (PDF), Judge William Fletcher stated unequivocally that “Garcetti does not—indeed, consistent with the First Amendment, cannot—apply to teaching and academic writing that are performed ‘pursuant to the official duties’ of a teacher and professor.”

 

if you care about First Amendment rights, esp. on college campuses, please visit the FIRE  website at the link. They are an extremely valuable organization for those love liberty!

First Amendment Hypocrisy on Campuses

A university Prof. wrote:

"As a university professor, I have seen, over the past few decades, just how misunderstood basic civil rights on campus can be. While people of all persuasions like to defend their side’s First Amendment rights, they tend to be less enthusiastic, if not downright hostile, when it comes to defending (or even tolerating) those with whom they disagree."

Retired S.Ct. Justice Stevens continues to attack Second Amendment rights.

Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens continues his "Feed My Ego" tour and continues to attack the individual right to keep and bear arms established in Heller and reaffirmed in McDonald.  I can't think of any case where a retired Justice campaigned against and individual right from the Bill of Rights.  These are dangerous times for those who love liberty. This is not surprising as Stevens voted against First Amendment rights in the flag-burning cases (Texas v. Johnson and U.S. v. Eichman) and Citizen's United. More left-wing authoritarianism on display.

More campus censorship

Consistent with the left-wing political correctness that dominates most universities, this Prof. went over the line in censoring an anti-Obama comment.http://thefire.org/torch/#14940.  However, on the minority of campuses where the right dominates, there are also restrictions on free speech.  Anyone who thinks most liberals or most conservatives really support the First Amendment, will probably be mistaken.

Left-Wing Authoritarianism at Work

The Left won't even respect First Amendment rights when it comes to gun material. A sad commentary on this country.

Occupy Wall Street: Economics and the First Amendment

The Occupy Wall Street folks are tremendously naive. They believe Wall Street is responsible for the collapse. Partly, but the U.S. government is more culpable. It started with federal legislation encouraging banks to make home loans to very high risk borrowers. It was exacerbated by a lack of investor confidence in the government and economy because of a federal debt that was out of control and an ObamaCare plan which would cost billions and jobs. Yes, there was criminality and corruption on Wall Street and it needs to be dealt with. However, bailing out obviously mismanaged firms sent the wrong message. They think some kind of socialism is the cure. (See Economist Walter Williams recent column) They haven't been doing much reading about the crisis in Greece and the EEU. They don't get it that there is no such thing as a free lunch or pie in the sky. However, I respect their First Amendment right to protest peacefully.

More authoritarianism in Higher ed at SHSU.

First Amendment rights take a hit at Sam Houston State University. Doesn't speak well for the learning atmosphere at SHSU. Doesn't anybody care about freedom of speech and press anymore?

Great report from FIRE on First Amendment rights on campus.

FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) is a leader in protecting due process and First Amendment rights on college and university campuses. Their annual report on Speech Codes is great reading for anyone who cares about this issue. There is a brief but good discussion of freedom of speech and higher education. Although there appears to be improvement, the lack of respect for the Supreme law of the land on public campuses is still appalling and disgraceful.

Victory for First Amendment

As I predicted earlier in this blog, the wackos won. Don't think of it as a defendant's victory in the obnoxious, offensive,funeral protest case as a victory for those wackos. Think of it as a victory for First Amendment values and the rule of law. Sometimes application of legal principles can result in a decision that rubs us the wrong way. The rule of law requires that even the wackos get First Amendment protection.

If you enjoy freedom stay in the U.S., If you want socialism, go to Europe

Bizarre case from France. I hope Americans appreciate the freedoms they have and will fight for them!

Concealed Carry on College Campuses

Legislation has been introduced in at least nine states, incl. Tex., Fla., Mich. and Ariz. to allow licensed concealed carry on college campuses. Persons who are licensed are no more likely to commit a crime on campus than they are in the community, and the latter are extremely rare. Even then, the crime may have been committed whether the person has the license or not. Rates of both violent and gun crime have been decreasing in spite of the vast increases in the number of guns and introduction of concealed carry licensing laws. Although many administrators and faculty wish it were not the case, both the Second and the First Amendment apply on college campuses. It amazes me how some campuses are so authoritarian. As was often the case when First Amendment rights were denied, the argument of danger to the public is made and is bogus.