Replies

It would appear that Supreme Court has changed its mind, and that Congress can make laws not only respecting, but restricting, free speech and freedom of the press. this in spite of the 1st amendment, which says they can't. Pretty much makes the entire Bill of Rights not worth the parchment they were printed on, doesn't it?

I hope McCain-Feingold will be tested and that it is shown that the SCOTUS were wrong to not deem it unconstitutional.

Of course it would have been nice if Pres. Bush vetoed the bill before it had a chance to become law.

I'd like to know which one of his(Bush's) "political advisors" told him that signing it would be a good move and the SCOTUS would say it was unconstitutional.

I'll tell ya one thing though, all of this is going to get me more involved politically. I live in FL and I will be working hard to get a Rep. Senator in Grahams seat.

I hope McCain-Feingold will be tested and that it is shown that the SCOTUS were wrong to not deem it unconstitutional.

The only place to test it will, in the end, be the SCOTUS. Think they'll reverse themsleves? Not next year, maybe after 3 replacements are put in. But even having a Republican President and Republican Senate is no guarantee that the replacements will be able to read the Constitution any better. After all, 7 of of the 9 Justices are Republican appointees as it is, and 2 of 3 likely to step down in the near future are as well. For this case 3 of the 5 who voted against the first amendment's plain "Congress shall make no law" language are Republican appointees. (But two of the 5 are on the likely replacee list, O'Connor and Ginsberg).