Skip to comments.Elena Kagan: Government Can Ban Political Pamphlets
Posted on 05/10/2010 4:18:18 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
(CNSNews.com) - Solicitor General Elena Kagan, nominated Monday to the U.S. Supreme Court by President Barack Obama, told that court in September that Congress could constitutionally prohibit corporations from engaging in political speech such as publishing pamphlets that advocate the election or defeat of a candidate for federal office.
Kagans argument that the government could prohibit political speech by corporations was rejected by a 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion in that case, and in a scathing concurrence Chief Justice John Roberts took direct aim at Kagans argument that the government could ban political pamphlets.
The Government urges us in this case to uphold a direct prohibition on political speech. It asks us to embrace a theory of the First Amendment that would allow censorship not only of television and radio broadcasts, but of pamphlets, posters, the Internet, and virtually any other medium that corporations and unions might find useful in expressing their views on matters of public concern, wrote Roberts. Its theory, if accepted, would empower the Government to prohibit newspapers from running editorials or opinion pieces supporting or opposing candidates for office, so long as the newspapers were owned by corporationsas the major ones are. First Amendment rights could be confined to individuals, subverting the vibrant public discourse that is at the foundation of our democracy.
Justice Kennedy described the law Kagan had defended as an illegitimate attempt to use censorship to control thought.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
This nominee needs to be sent down in flames.
I predict that at least 5 GOP Senators will vote for her.
Now, does ANYONE have any doubts why this radical anti-constitutionalist was selected ??
A Free Speech Enemy.
No wonder Obama nominated another of his fat, hideous pig women.
That was her?
She is the one who thinks the government can even censor Kindle downloads??
I don’t like her, of course, but she may have only “been following orders” as Solicitor General. She did her job, and SCOTUS did its.
The list, ping
This Lesbian Nominee by the Alleged Usurper of the Office of President of the United States is one very Scarey and Dangerous Dude who appears to be against All the Freedoms America holds dear to her Heart!
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
Community and individuality are not opposites. People cannot survive on their own. When the odds are stacked against you, you must rally with the oppressed and hated.
When a growing oppressive regime is taking hold, you must act, otherwise you will soon face your enemy alone and hopeless.
Strength of community is a strength as much as individualism, as long you are willing to face weaknesses in your own community. Ignoring slacking values will mean that you will be rallied against by those you oppress.
Niemöller affirms we must rally against unhealthy organized regimes. We must also stay vigilant with those that appear to be good natured, as all organisation attracts corruption. Niemöller also warns us that if it is you who are corrupt, then you will face a stronger combined force of foe!
That 1984 commercial about hillary definitely applies to bo now.
I sure hope no RINOS vote for this communist. They are crazy to think they can get away with this crap. Why do no Repuplicans come out and call a communist a communist. Jeez???
Not gonna happen - even it all Reps suddenly grew a backbone, she would still make it thru the Senate
I think there will be more, knowing how the Pubbies of the Senate operate in their ‘good ole boy club’.
Question. Can judges be impeached??
She an Obama feel differently about labor union endorsements I’m sure.
No word on whether she agrees with Obama that you should put away that distracting i-pod and pick up the NYTimes instead.
Bo and Luke too?
Or did you maybe mean something else that was obscured by laziness or illiteracy?
I think this is the one that might topple this nominee, but I wonder if even the conservative media will run with it
Oboma just gave a graduation speech that endorsed censorship - of accurate news only. All left wing propaganda sites, papers, and channels are acceptable, though.
Kagan’s nomination, and likely approval, is a testament to all the NITWIT conservatives out there who found that Romney wasn’t perfect enough, or that McCain wasn’t perfect enough.
Well, because they weren’t perfect enough, we got Obama. And now for 40 years or so, we’ll have Kagan.
Thank you, all you highly principled conservatives who thought that Romney wasn’t conservative enough. Or that McCain wasn’t conservative enough.
Is Obama conservative enough for you? How about Sotomayor? How about Kagan?
Elections have consequences.
This is unlikely to end well.
McCain, Rino-vich, Snowe, Collins and Graham?
Commie Law 101: the Hatch act doesn’t apply to the WH, but it does apply to private companies.
I agree with her that corporations are not people. I would support a ban on corporations engaging in politics.
I don’t know. Normally I would agree with you about the “good ole boys, politics as usual RINO club”. But the licking Bob
Bennett just took in UT is still fresh. Odds are that she will be confirmed...but the stage is set for some interesting debate and procedural tactics.
No wonder Zero nominated this woman.
On Sunday, Barry gave a speech where he rails against different points of view on the Internet and then on Monday he nominates a woman who thinks certain type of political speech can be banned.
Why is Obongo so freaked out about that SC ruling? He’s really worried about it.
In the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling on Thursday, every American should be worried when the president of the United States starts threatening the highest court in the land.
Barack Obamas Justice Department. During argument, the Obama administrations lawyer, Solicitor General Elena Kagan, made extravagant claims about the extent to which government can censor its critics, outlawing books, movies, and other methods of informing the public.
The vote to confirm will be at least 98-2 every Republican voting to confirm and maybe two Democrats desening if the past is ny judge of the future of confirming votes for Democrat appointees.
President Bush’s apointees had a different outcome.
She will get her marching orders from the same source as the MSM traitors. It is just a living breathing constitution ya know.
I recall the Pretender in Chief got all hissy and started lecuring the Supreme Court during the State of the Union. It was on the same issue that this woman argued before the Supreme Court. Bit of payback for ruling against his administration? Don’t rule against me! I’ll show you, I’m sending Kagan back to the court, this time as a justice.
We need a whole lot more of those to really change minds. Many are two-faced, one for the cameras and one to reach across the aisle.
Nothing would please me more than seeing backbone and total turn arounds in the Pubbies. But the Dems still have the votes regardless.
Unless some Dems are running scared, but I think they have given up for a last harrah.
She did this the Solicitor General, no? That is not really damning IMO. She was just doing Obama’s bidding. That is going to be the response to any questions people have of her work during the last year or so.
What the Republicans (or, if not them, at least a coalition of decent minded men who fear, rightly, about the course this nation is taking) have to do is string this nomination out for as long as possible, and then flush it down the toilet where it belongs.
We need to buy time to get us to January, if we can.
That is a very tiresome argument that has nothing to do with the real world. I don’t know a single conservative who voted for Obama or who refused to vote for McCain for not being “conservative enough”, so you don’t need to preach.
“That is a very tiresome argument that has nothing to do with the real world. I dont know a single conservative who voted for Obama or who refused to vote for McCain for not being conservative enough, so you dont need to preach.”
It is a tiresome argument to those who are guilty of it.
There are plenty here on this board who vowed not to vote for McCain, much less do what they could to get him elected.
And there are more who hate Romney.
US Constitution; Art 3, Sec 1 The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.I guess it depends on the definition of Good Behavior.
>Kagans nomination, and likely approval, is a testament to all the NITWIT conservatives out there who found that Romney wasnt perfect enough, or that McCain wasnt perfect enough.
John “Amnesty” McCain? *snort*
>Well, because they werent perfect enough, we got Obama. And now for 40 years or so, well have Kagan.
You’re assuming the system won’t collapse soon.
>Thank you, all you highly principled conservatives who thought that Romney wasnt conservative enough. Or that McCain wasnt conservative enough.
You’re welcome / If we keep settling for ‘good enough’ how long before ‘good enough’ isn’t?
>Is Obama conservative enough for you? How about Sotomayor? How about Kagan?
>Elections have consequences.
Sure they do... but you’re assuming that we have fair and/or honest elections; I’m willing to bet money that Iraq’s elections are both more fair and more honest.
Impeachment is the only way to rid the country of a federal judge.
The most notable recent case is Alcee Hastings, a federal district judge in Florida. He was impeached and convicted of accepting a bribe in 1988.
Alas, the miscreant was then elected to Congress in 1992 -- where he remains to this day.
Our Freepers our great but short-sighted sometimes. This will change our course forever.
Your “bumper sticker, sound bite” answers are all disjointed, with no central core of related reasonability. There’s no theme, other than hatred and ignorance.
>And there are more who hate Romney.
If I were forced to vote, right now, for ONLY either Obama or Romney I would vote for Obama. The reasons are fairly simple, he is running out of “good graces” with the people, which would be restored somewhat for a change in President; also to consider is that Obama *IS* uniting people.
>Your bumper sticker, sound bite answers are all disjointed, with no central core of related reasonability. Theres no theme, other than hatred and ignorance.
Because your spiel is so full of holes, intellectually speaking, it’s hard for me to pick just one avenue of approach.