[aristeides]

I believe even the majority of the Supreme Court today admitted they were limiting freedom of speech. They thought that was justified by the higher good of avoiding corruption and even the appearance of corruption. Just where does that higher good appear in the Constitution? Does this not mean that any constitutional provision can be trumped by some higher good that the courts dream up?

[My2Cents]

Put that way, no. In which case the best thing to do is to get people on the courts who respect the Constitution in its original intent. You think that will happen if Hillary or Howard Dean become President? Or if people throw their votes away on the Constitution Party? Politics is messy business, in case you hadn't noticed, and the ironic thing is that the best way to avoid such decisions in the short-term future is to re-elect GW Bush, and send more Republicans to the US Senate.

[Lazamataz]

I believe even the majority of the Supreme Court today admitted they were limiting freedom of speech. They thought that was justified by the higher good of avoiding corruption and even the appearance of corruption

Same justification they will use to gut the Second Amendment. "We know we are violating the Second Amendment, but we are justified by the higher good of protecting children Yadda Yadda Yadda."

The United States really has no purpose any more.