Alito Calls Free-Speech Limits 'Dangerous' as Court Considers Cases

Source: WaPo

Alito Calls Free-Speech Limits 'Dangerous' as Court Considers Cases

By Robert Barnes
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, June 14, 2007; A25

<SNIP>

Two of the court's biggest remaining cases focus on the First Amendment, and while Alito didn't mention either, he did make it clear that any restrictions on speech face a high hurdle with him.

"I'm a very strong believer in the First Amendment and the right of people to speak and to write," Alito said in response to a question of "where's the line" on what can be posted on the Internet. "I would be reluctant to support restrictions on what people could say."

The newest justice, who was protective of speech rights as an appellate judge, added that "some restrictions have been held to be consistent with the First Amendment, but it's very dangerous for the government to restrict speech."

Alito's vote is expected to be influential and perhaps decisive in two of the court's biggest cases concerning free-speech restrictions.

One is the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" case in which the court is examining whether a principal violated the rights of a student who unfurled that message along a parade route across from the school. It's considered the most important student speech case to reach the court in decades.

And the court is also deciding a challenge to a part of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law that says corporations, unions and special interest groups may not name federal candidates in ads broadcast in the run-up to elections. A group called Wisconsin Right to Life says that is an unconstitutional infringement on free speech.

<SNIP>

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/13/AR2007061302063_pf.html

:eyes: I submit, even though we all know a filibuster would have been smartly over-ridden, this action would have SET A STANDARD OF RESOLVE. More important for our Democratic Senators, it would have scored them even more VOTES in 2006 and again would have proven fruitful for the Democrats in the upcoming 2008 elections.

But "keep their powder dry" our Democratic Congress will do until, IMO, we are no longer a Democratic Republic. :(

Ms. Pelosi, Listen to Rep. Kucinich and put IMPEACHMENTS back ON the table? :patriot:

they will have a list of "innuendos" and then just show stock footage of a candidate. Does free speech apply to trumped up lies,
no, but to many of the power elite it does. Yes, I begged my Senator to block Alito, of course, we know how that worked out.
Oh, and his wife cried becuz of the big bad senators, we should have cried.

for we all know that Alito's definition of "free speech" begin and end with unregulated campaigning of large corporations on behalf of electing "YES men and women" to the realization of a One World Order, NOT for the kid who organized the protest, "Bong Hits for Jesus."

Gee, I honestly envision my beloved Savior, Jesus, crying now to when he realized that America stands for CORPORATE GREED ... at any cost. :cry: :(

just like their right to vote is making sure that you never get the chance. Either by purging the voting rolls or hokey pokey
at the polls either by not supplying enough machines or by supplying faulty machines or rigged machines.

As long as the our USA Corporate M$M avidly enables the One World Order and PNAC's agenda with constant barrages of disinformation, lies and distortions, "The People" of the USA will remain ignorant of all the horrific acts of murder and barbarity that this Unitary Executive is unleashing on the world, "IN OUR NAME." :grr:

Only when we pull our troops out of the Middle East Arena can we adequately address our own Country's faults such as immigration, livable wages and health care for all Americans.

Every day the stench of corruption gets stronger, soon even Congress will not be able to ignore it.

Ignore it, hell they wallow in it. Congress reaks of corruption and that hasn't changed in decades...

Barbara Mikulski, and I think that we have to be wise consumers, be alert and aware of the issues and let them know of
your issues and concerns, I write Sen. Mikulski all the time, I have even written to Bush and asked him not to invade Iran,
they are our elects Reps.

When the US entered WW I, there was a national conscription to fight in the trenches of Europe. This was the first conscription since passage of the 16th Amendment prohibited involuntary servitude, and caused a fair bit of national unrest. In response, Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917 which, among other things, made it a federal crime to interfere with recruitment or conscription efforts with punishment of up to $10,000 (almost $170,000 in today's dollar) and up to 20 years in jail. (This law still exists as 18 USC sec. 2388)

In 1918, Charles Schenck, a Socialist, was arrested for handing out pamphlets which called the national conscription a violation of the 16th Amendment. The actual charges were conspiring to hinder recruitment during a time of war and encouraging insubordination during a time of war. He was convicted and appealed to the United States Supreme Court. In the ruling of Schenck v. United States, the Court set out limitations on the right to free speech and upheld Schenck's conviction.

It would be interesting to hear Alito's views, if restrictions on free speech are so harmful. Would he be so sanguine with regards to anti-war speech? What about speech against the president and vice-president?

Will use this law to jail anti-draft activists

Up the ante if we want to stay in the game (OUR government and country)