They can TELL me whatever they want to tell me. Will it happen or not is another story!
Now that will certainly go to court as I am sure someone is going to test it.
Yes.
The Secret Service can do whatever it damned well pleases and there’s not a thing we can do about it.
"Any place"?
Could that be a big place, you know, like the whole country?
Praetorian Guard?
lemme see...wasn’t their a previous incarnation of an SS with such authority? .....Europe ...Germany....70 years ago....
Enforcement of this law will be the problem. I’m pretty sure law enforcement will not be willing to enforce it the way the lawmakers envision. Just as surely the law will be tested; Americans are not accustomed to being silenced, on either side of the political divide.
This fiasco has backfire written all over it. It’s an invitation to break the law, and makes it more likely, not less, that chaos and riot could ensue from benign and peaceful gatherings.
Come on they will just be “following orders” from das fuhrer and “fearless Reader”. You all remember how well that worked out the last time.
And NO, we cannot count on the USSC to issue a brilliant decision based solely upon the US Constitution as they have shown themselves to be NOTHING but political hacks with their endless stream of 5-4 decisions.
The USSC judges must have all gone to public school hence the inability to agree on the meaning of a rather short document describing the limits of government and the supremacy of citizens over that government. It takes a lawyer to screw things up this bad.
A computer, with a download of the US Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence and the Federalist papers would do a much better job of making Constitutionally based decisions than these black robed traitors to all of us. If these morons cannot agree on our most basic founding document then how in the hell are we as average citizens (aka honest non-lawyers) supposed to know what the hundreds of thousands of pages of obscure legal hieroglyphs mean?
If 4 of the USSC judges cannot figure out the constitutionality of a law then, IMO, ignorance of the law is a very valid excuse.
Napolitano is right.
Coming from a Commissar near you.
Keeping the barrel clean.
Free speech does not mean the government is obligated to provide you a venue nor an audience. It can be argued that what many view as free speech today is a product of “evolving constitutional standards”. Something we conservatives don’t generally like.
It’s difficult to believe that free speech is not mostly about protesting, but rather mostly about advocacy, the former is about abusing decorum to gain quick notoriety while the latter adheres to decorum for civil discourse.
In any course, I don’t know if the law being talked about is good bad or indifferent with regards to free speech. I do think that such laws come about because somebody was abusing the process and probably gaining traction against the opposition.
It’s likely the new laws will be used more to stifle somber and deliberate conservatives, only to be called into question when used versus hysterically radical leftists.
Now, where were the RINOs when this travesty occurred?
If the SS (coincidence here?) is holding the gun, you betcha.
If I’m the one holding the gun, not so much.
.
“only three members of the House voted against it”
Anyone know who?
Now, not only can they tell you to shut up, they can use deadly force against you if you don’t. And when they do wag after wag on this forum will opine and post that you got what you deserved and how heroicaly they shot you down. And for good measure they take out your wife, children and dog
The SS needs to abide by their constitutional oathe....
It's more George III than George III. This is Star Chamber stuff.
Cardinal Torquemada, call your office.