Posted on 03/24/2009 2:28:56 PM PDT by april15Bendovr
WASHINGTON, March 24 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court appeared divided on Tuesday over a challenge to a campaign finance law by a conservative group in a case that could open the door to fewer restrictions on political advertising.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Liberals never felt that way about Michael Moore did they?
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The first amendment is in the constitution to protect the citizens from the government.
Congress shall pass no law...means campaign finance reform regarding what advertising or press about (for or against) a candidate must be limited is unconstitutional.
Congress shall pass no law...means that fairness doctrine judging and ruling on political speech on public air waves is unconstitutional.
Congress shall pass no law...means that “Separation of Church and State...” wait a minute...that's not in the constitution? Why then it must be law...Nope. It was a judicial ruling. Funny how it is quoted as a law or in the constitution...I guess it doesn't apply here.
“Free speech” without the freedom to criticize the government is slavery.
radical leftwing propaganda will never get scrutinized of course
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.