[PGalt]

^

[TLI]

Surprisingly, the one dissent came from Chief Justice John Roberts,

Nope.

Not surprised.

.

[alternatives?]

Roberts is the standing moot justice.

[immadashell]

Perhaps even loudly and clearly enough for Academia’s elites.

Deserved to be repeated...so I have.

[Bob434]

I wonder if the Capitol peaceful protesters can sue for having their free speech denied by being arrested after being allowed into the Capitol by police?

[Rusty0604]

Good! Thanks for posting.

[drop 50 and fire for effect]

The most important part of this ruling is the overwhelming vote. Even Sonia Sotomayor agreed. This is an important win that gives people a weapon against “cancel culture” would be Red Guard types.

[Honorary Serb]

ALL universities and college MUST be centers of free speech!!!! And the courts must make them fire their “deans of diversity”, and other such anti-free speech and anti-Christian administrators!!!!

And all members of university communities must be free to practice their faith openly, to have easy access to their Church or other worship center, and to have faith-based student and faculty organizations on or near campus!!!!

[Macoozie]

“a claim for small or largely symbolic damages is enough to give a plaintiff the legal right to sue and prevent a case from being moot”

Maybe they should apply that simple test to the Election THEFT cases brought by Our PDJT and other parties.

[chajin]

Not to be the party pooper, but if all the leftist SCOTUS Justices agree on something, there has to be something wrong with it.

I don’t know what yet, but the Left will use this ruling somehow to stymie conservative and/or Judeo-Christian speech, or to overwhelm colleges with Marxist and/or Muslim speech.

[DesertRhino]

I though the free speech zone was everything between Maine and Los Angeles. Roberts does not agree.

[piasa]

Speaking of the Alliance Defending Freedom [ADF] - it has been a target of the far left hate-hoax profiteering group SPLC :

Amy Coney Barrett’s former classmates and even sorority sisters signed a letter to the president of her alma mater, Rhodes College, resorting to some far-left smear tactics to oppose President Donald Trump’s nomination of Barrett to the Supreme Court. Among other things, the alumni’s letter savages ACB for speaking at an event sponsored by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), citing the far-left scandal-plagued smear factory the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) accusation that ADF is a “hate group” worthy of inclusion on a list with the Ku Klux Klan.

[falcon99]

As usual, Roberts continues his history of the most convoluted and completely unintellectual “rasoning”.

[Midwesterner53]

Why is it surprising Roberts dissented?

[ctdonath2]

I really tried to give Roberts benefit of doubt, but after “I would place a higher value on Article III” no more.

Article III opines “the judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity”. Indeed, an infringement on rights costing the infringed just $1 is still an infringement on rights which shall not be infringed. In anecdote, I have a rifle I paid just $29 for; that HR127 would cost me that $29 on a right which “shall not be infringed” - and Roberts would allow the infringement, the cost being only a few minutes of my time.

I propose coming a phrase: “a Roberts’ dollar”, the price some will sell out your rights for.
May it join “30 pieces of silver”, “a little earth and water”, etc.

[scouter]

I don't see anything in here that would keep this ruling from applying to Second Amendment cases. In fact, Thomas rules here, and gets a surprising amount of consensus, that the violation of a core constitutional right is essentially enough of real damage to grant standing. That pretty much seals the deal on whether the same principle would apply to other constitutional rights, such as the right to bear arms, the right to a fair election, the right to peaceably assemble, even during a pandemic, etc.

The question I have is... can we sue the bost3rds for more than $1 when these things happen?