Posted on 09/25/2014 9:05:39 AM PDT by Oldpuppymax
The looney Left is after Rush Limbaugh again. They have a maniacal fixation with trying to destroy him because they don’t like what he says. The Left has always believed that freedom of speech applies only to them. Over the past sixty years the media has coddled and supported the Left by encouraging the belief that they are not subject to the rules and laws the rest of us have to live under. This delusion could be brought to a dead stop with one simple move.
A recent case in point involves a group of ten Leftist loons who have launched a “Get Rush Limbaugh off the air,” campaign. While this is not the first time this has been tried, it is different from past efforts because Rush is making it different: He is fighting back and the names of these people have been exposed.
The question now is, “What to do with this information?”
One aggressive response that Rush might want to consider is a federal lawsuit for “tortious interference with contractual relations.” Case law says you cannot actively work to induce a party to a contract to break the terms of the contract.
These ten people could be taught a lesson about what is permissible and not permissible when you are trying to strip someone of his Constitutional right to make a living and say what he believes in a public forum.
A bit of research reveals that, “ Tortious interference, also known as intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when a person intentionally damages the plaintiff‘s contractual or other business relationships. This tort is broadly divided into two categories, one specific to contractual relationships (irrespective of whether they involve business), and the other specific to business relationships or activities...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
Interesting point.
It means that there should be a concerted effort of listeners who figure out a way to sue the campaign (is there any tie to any body of government somehow?) under a freedom of speech law - with us (listeners who hold similar opinions as Rush) as the grieved party?
There are very few places in the public airwaves where our opinion is allowed.
I think there could be a case. Maybe even civil rights. If gay rights are civil rights, than what about conservatives’ rights?
What would 10 accidents look like? Could they be considered “Flukes”?
Freedom of speech prevents the government from restraining free speech. How does that apply in this instance?
One aggressive response that Rush might want to consider is a federal lawsuit for “tortious interference with contractual relations.” Case law says you cannot actively work to induce a party to a contract to break the terms of the contract. “
That will go the way of the Bohner lawsuit.
I can just see a judge telling Rush that he has no standing in the case.
civil rico...
To be perfectly honest a suit like that would be baseless and Rush knows that and wont go for it.
Rallying the public to boycott a business because your organization doesn't like one of his heads, Rush in this case, is considered first amendment.
Its not even argument-able.
Besides, Rush is well established. He can always get sponsors.
Well here we are seven weeks later and Rush IS suing. Not the same grounds but it’s a start.
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.