Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ken H
"Nope, it would be challenged as a violation of other rights."

Yes. My mistake.

Fire in a theater or Campaign Finance Reform -- if Congress finds that the speech violates some other right, then the states cannot allow it. No way.

The reason? Because it is incorporated and also applies to the states. If it were not incorporated, the state may find that the right to free speech supersedes the other right that is violated.

The argument against "hate" speech is an excellent example. Individual state courts may find that the right to use "hate" speech supersedes some right not to be offended. Left to the states, they would allow it.

But since the First Amendment is incorporated, the USSC defines what's more important. If the USSC decides that right not to be offended (or whatever it is) supersedes the right to use hate speech, then ALL states must conform and ban hate speech.

The same is true for CC. IF incorporated , and the USSC decides that the 5th amendment right that is violated supersedes the Second Amendment right to CC, then ALL states must conform. If the USSC has previously decided (in our example) that the Second Amendment does NOT protect the right to CC, then the USSC's job is even easier.

225 posted on 05/04/2005 4:28:17 AM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies ]


To: robertpaulsen
Fire in a theater or Campaign Finance Reform -- if Congress finds that the speech violates some other right, then the states cannot allow it. No way.

Congress? We've been talking about USSC finding a violation. Let's stick with USSC.

The reason? Because it is incorporated and also applies to the states.

I'm assuming "it" is referring to the First Amentment, right?

If it [First Amendment?- kh] were not incorporated, the state may find that the right to free speech supersedes the other right that is violated.

If USSC says "other rights" (which we have been assuming are incorporated) are violated, the State cannot say otherwise.

The argument against "hate" speech is an excellent example. Individual state courts may find that the right to use "hate" speech supersedes some right not to be offended. Left to the states, they would allow it.

Correct.

But since the First Amendment is incorporated, the USSC defines what's more important. If the USSC decides that right not to be offended (or whatever it is) supersedes the right to use hate speech, then ALL states must conform and ban hate speech.

You repeated your mistake. If USSC says "hate speech" violates "other rights", then the State Court cannot say otherwise regardless of whether the First Amendment applies to States or not.

The same is true for CC. IF incorporated , and the USSC decides that the 5th amendment right that is violated supersedes the Second Amendment right to CC, then ALL states must conform.

All States must conform to such a rulng if Second Amendment is unincorporated as well. Are you saying otherwise?

227 posted on 05/04/2005 9:25:15 AM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson