Wednesday, June 30, 2004
Supreme Court Rules That Forcing Porn Sites to Restrict Access to Children Violates First Amendment
This ruling wouldn't bother me so much, but the Court ruled that restrictions on political speech, also known as campaign finance reform, don't violate the first amdendment. Even though the first amendment was written primarily to protect political speech.
When that law is used to restrict advertising for Fahrenheiht 911 later in the summer I think more people will understand that campaign finance reform is a violation to the Constitution.
There appears to be no attempt for the Court to try to be consistent in its reasoning, nor does it seem to care about consistency. Scalia is exempted from this criticism, since he actually takes impacts into other Constitutional areas into his arguments.
This ruling wouldn't bother me so much, but the Court ruled that restrictions on political speech, also known as campaign finance reform, don't violate the first amdendment. Even though the first amendment was written primarily to protect political speech.
When that law is used to restrict advertising for Fahrenheiht 911 later in the summer I think more people will understand that campaign finance reform is a violation to the Constitution.
There appears to be no attempt for the Court to try to be consistent in its reasoning, nor does it seem to care about consistency. Scalia is exempted from this criticism, since he actually takes impacts into other Constitutional areas into his arguments.
