Mo1 wrote: “You, for what ever reason are refusing to note the difference between civil and government cases .. and there is a huge difference”
I’m not refusing to note a difference between civil and government cases. I’m aware government can’t restrict my free speech beyond the legal limitations noted previously in this thread (i.e. Fighting Words, slander, etc). I’m also aware people can sue more for just about anything they want. What I keep asking is how they can possibly use civil suites to restrict my constitutionally protected freedoms. I gave a 2nd Amendment example. Let’s say someone sued me merely for carrying a weapon on my private property because they found it offensive or intimidating. Let’s say they just don’t like weapons. If a judge/jury ruled against me, couldn’t I appeal the case all the way to the SCOTUS if necessary? And, if I appealed it, wouldn’t I win because civil rulings can’t arbitrarily deny constitutionally protected rights?
Perhaps I’m making too fine of a distinction, but I’m looking at some of the SCOTUS decisions and they aren’t necessarily about a government agency/public official versus a private citizen. Some of them appear to be rulings on disputes between private companies.
I may be misinterpreting what other FReepers posted, but some seem to be saying the SCOTUS and other levels of appeal don’t have anything to do in civil cases. Yet, it appears they do rule on civil cases that affect constitutionally protected rights. If I’m wrong, please explain it to me. Can civil cases restrict constitutionally protected freedoms?
You didn’t mention anything in that post about appealing and taking it to the USSC
Supposing it even got that far ... which I highly doubt it would .. alot of it would depend on if they would even hear the case and who’s sitting on the court at the time
Better hope the libs don’t get a chance at packing the courts
With that said .. a case like that is no where close to being like the Phelps and I’m not sure why you are changing the subject