I agree.
Laws that protect elected officials from the words of the electorate are just one more way that the political class have used their positions to enact statutes to coddle themselves.
The First Amendment was put there specifically to protect political speech. Our Founding Fathers, and other politicians of the day endured much more in the way of hate speech than our pampered minders of today.
I love Governor Haley, by the way, but she needs to call the dogs off on this one.
16-17-735 False assertion of authority of law, in attempt to intimidate or hinder state or local official in discharge of duties, by threats or use of sham legal process.
16-3-1040(A) Threatening life, person or family of public official
16-8-240(B) Use of or threat of physical violence by criminal gang member
“I agree.
Laws that protect elected officials from the words of the electorate are just one more way that the political class have used their positions to enact statutes to coddle themselves.
The First Amendment was put there specifically to protect political speech. Our Founding Fathers, and other politicians of the day endured much more in the way of hate speech than our pampered minders of today.
I love Governor Haley, by the way, but she needs to call the dogs off on this one.”
I agree except the 1st amendment to the Federal Constitution Most explicitly does not apply here. What apples here is Article 1 section 2 of the South Carolina Constitution which as I quoted has very much the same restriction upon South Carolinian as the 1st Amendment to the Federal Constitution has on the Federal Goverment.
We need to be specific, Federal usurpation of incorporation MUST be overturned along with all other Federal usurpation. It is not authorized nor is it needed.