Kagan again. Freedom of speech only if the government feels it's acceptablecreated 5/12/2010 - 11:42 am, updated 5/12/2010 - 12:15 pm by Chris |
More on the candidate for SCOTUS, Elena Kagan, this time from washingtonexaminer.com. Sounds like big-government, "living" Constitution, liberal lawyer speak to me. :Sp Remember folks, appointments to the Supreme Court are for a lifetime...
Freedom of speech, religion and other First Amendment issues are likely to be among the most visible during the coming Senate confirmation hearings on President Obama's nomination of Solicitor General Elena Kagan for the U.S. Supreme Court.
As an illustration why, consider this quote dug up by the First Amendment Center's David L. Hudson, who found it in a government brief signed by Kagan in United States v Stevens: “Whether a given category of speech enjoys First Amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs.”
The case concerned a statute that made it criiminally unlawful to depict animal cruelty. The Court rejected Kagan's reasoning, but had the justices accepted her assertion, it would have effectively repealed the First Amendment's protection of speech and replaced it by granting government the authority to decide what speech should be permitted.
You can read the entirety of Kagan's brief here, and additional analysis by Hudson of Kagan's record on First Amendment issues here.
- Add new comment
- 192 reads
- Permalink
Other stories that might interest you:
- Ethics complaint papers ready to be filed for disbarment of Elena Kagan
- Regarding Elena Kagan’s Appointment to the SCOTUS
- Two more reasons to just say no to Kagan confirmation
- SC nominee Kagan doesn't "have a view of what are natural rights, independent of the Constitution"
- Warrentless GPS tracking will lead to "1984"
- New documents reveal Kagan defending Clinton veto of partial-birth abortion ban
- Federal Appeals gets it right - Dearborn violated free speech rights
- Bill of Rights erosion continues - California court rules privacy law supersedes First Amendment
- Federal judge ignores 1st Amendment in lieu of political correctness
- SC nominee Elena Kagen, partial-birth abortion, and the lies she told the White House