Posted on 03/25/2009 7:44:15 AM PDT by STARWISE
One minute they were debating whether an anti-Hillary Clinton video could be shown during her Democratic primary campaign.
And the next, U.S. Supreme Court justices launched into a spirited debate over whether election laws could lead to, say, banning books.
“The government’s position is that the First Amendment allows the banning of a book if it’s published by a corporation?” Justice Samuel Alito asked incredulously.
The case involved a much narrower question — whether the conservative advocacy group Citizens United could use a cable-based video-on-demand service to distribute its 90-minute anti-Clinton documentary.
A panel of three district court judges found the film was a not-so-thinly veiled attempt to undercut Clinton’s presidential bid and that it could be constitutionally restricted by the government.
The book-banning talk came after a Federal Election Commission lawyer, Malcolm Stewart, argued that Congress would have the right to ban corporations from publishing certain books before an election — even though lawmakers have so far put limits only on broadcast, cable and satellite transmissions.
Chief Justice John Roberts looked exasperated as he asked if a book could be halted before an election “even if there’s one clause, one sentence in the 600-page book” that mentioned a federal candidate.
“Of course, the government can’t ban that,” Justice Stephen Breyer said, referring to Roberts’ hypothetical book. “The only question is who’s paying for it.”
Late in the arguments, Justice Antonin Scalia seized on what could be narrow ground to resolve the case of the video-on-demand delivery system.
“Where you have both somebody who wants to speak and someone who affirmatively wants to hear what he has to say, and the government says, ‘No, the two of you can’t do this,’ ... it seems to me that’s a stronger First Amendment interest,” he said.
~~~~
Supreme Court Hears Arguments Over Anti-Hillary Movie
###
*snip*
This is the third significant case before the Supreme Court to challenge the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act--widely known as McCain-Feingold--that restricts the flow of money into political races.
*snip*
"The government cannot prove and has not attempted to prove that a 90-minute documentary made available to people who choose affirmatively to receive it..." (Ted) Olson said.
"Indeed, this documentary is the very definition of robust, uninhibited debate about a subject of intense political interest that the First Amendment is there to guarantee."
Earlier this decade, the court ruled that the McCain-Feingold law's prohibition on corporate electioneering communications, as well as its reporting, disclosure, and disclaimer requirements were not facially invalid. The court later clarified its position to say that only messages of "express advocacy" or its functional equivalent could be prohibited.
A decision is expected by June.
~~PING!
For the party that should have known better, there’s a lot of blame to be placed.
What list is this?
Also -bookmark-
Sale of, let's say, The Audacity of Hope must be halted during an election cycle.
Or, any mainstream media broadcasts with an obvious editorial slant must be banned.
If you ban one, you've got to ban them ALL. You can't just stop at anti-candidate opinion. You've also got to ban pro-candidate opinion, also. Right?!?!
In my way of thinking the first amendment means one should be able to publish anything he wants anytime he wants.
I don’t remember any scrutiny about the book on how to murder Geo W or any of the despicable films about him.
Praying that Ted Olsen can take this whole thing far enough to get McCain-Feingold tossed out altogether. Thanks for the ping.
However, liberals wouldn’t object to a video of George Bush having sex with sheep.
Seems pretty clear-cut, but leave it to Souter and Ginzberg and company to come up with mind-boggling logic-defying language-twisting interpretations of the 1ST Amendment as to why this film should be censored.
Wow once again Justice Scalia proves why Rush Limbaugh often says that if he could exchange his brain for someone else’s it would be Scalia’s
We live in a bizarro world where the courts let the government ban the sort of free speech the First Amendment was written to protect yet use it to give absoluate protection to pornographers for works that have no artistic or political value.
Michael Moore
##
Fahrenheit 9/11
SiCKO
Bowling For Columbine
.
.
Major film studios
##
W
Rendition
Redacted
~~~~
The Liberal Bastille
*snip*
During the last 8 years, I have rarely been to an audition waiting room where I have not been assaulted with anti-Bush, anti-Reagan, anti-Republican outbursts. Speaking up alone, one against five or ten righteous liberals is foolish, I know because I’ve tried it…. There is never a sense of decorum. I have never heard a pro-Bush, Pro-Reagan, Pro-Republican outburst!
Even while on the job, during the lead up to the last election, liberal actors would without hesitation blurt out ugly anti-Sarah Palin nonsense just seconds before you have to be very, very funny. Words like “Abu Ghraib” are substituted for scripted text as a sarcastic admonition, to clarify moral superiority and solidarity with others in the room.
The lack of respect for differing thought is symptomatic of no thought. This is the atmosphere that every conservative in Hollywood deals with. There is a job every now and then that is an exception to this; a job where this never happens and you lift your arms to God in thanks for that job.
Now let me be specific about events that apply only to me.
I don’t mean to imply that similar events haven’t occurred to others, but that these events have shaped my understanding of liberal Hollywood.
In 1980 I had the privilege of working with Charlton Heston at the Ahmanson Theater in Los Angeles in Paul Giovanni’s Sherlock Holmes thriller “The Crucifer of Blood.” One evening, following a rehearsal, Mr. Heston asked me very politely about the election between Carter and Reagan. I was a huge Reagan supporter, as was he, so for about 25 minutes we engaged in a conversation that will stay with me forever.
I don’t think Chuck, as he wanted to be called, had any idea of my political persuasion, although it is possible that Paul Giovanni, who I absolutely adored, could have given him a nod that we were of like minds when it came to politics. In any event, I took the memory of that rehearsal conversation, and my joy over the Reagan win with me to The Williamstown Theater Festival in the summer of 1981.
Artistic director Nikos Psacharopoulos and Williamstown represent for me the highlight of my career. In terms of pure personal satisfaction, I had never experienced such mutual confidence from a director nor the kind of freedom he gave me. He showcased my talents and actually allowed me to choose the role I wanted to play in my debut year of 1978.
Many doors were opened to me as a result, and one of them would lead to the pure great fortune of landing my role on “The A-Team.”
Blythe Danner was just one of the talented luminaries ensconced at the Festival. This was a fast paced summer theater where, somehow, great productions sprang from the tension of a tight two week schedule, and there was always a wonderful opening night buffet, an actor’s favorite, provided by some of the generous patrons from Williamstown.
At an opening night party I was talking quite openly and happily about my conversation with Charlton Heston concerning Reagan’s win, and as I moved to the end of the food line an unfamiliar voice popped up: “Dwight, so you’re a Reagan a**hole!”
It was Bruce Paltrow, Blythe Danner’s husband.
That is how I knew him at the time, and I was stunned by his comment. I cannot even remember my reply. Whatever it was it was bereft of brave retort. I told Nikos’s assistant about Paltrow’s aggressive comment and wondered why there was such hostility. Was the political aspect a cover for nailing a non talent? I was assured “That is Bruce…don’t take it personally…. He was probably joking…testing you.”
Paltow never said another substantive thing to me. He never said “good job” or “nice to see you again,” only an occasional very limp “hello.”
In very late 1981 or early 1982, I was called in to read for the part of Fiscus in the upcoming series “St. Elsewhere” produced by Paltrow. I ran into Howie Mandel, with his familiar blown up rubber glove hanging from his belt, and the guy who would eventually land the role.
He was standing just outside the waiting room, and as I headed toward that designated area I passed a small narrow side room in which Bruce Paltrow was seated on a desk chair with wheels; he turned to me, rolled a little in my direction and said, “Dwight! What are you doing here?” This is not a question an actor wants to hear before an audition; not from the show’s producer.
I told him I was called in to read for Fiscus and his response was soft and monotonic,
“…There’s not going to be a Reagan a**hole on this show!”
He then turned away, and went back to his desk. I was unable to overcome the totality of my crumble, my inability to deal with that kind of personal garroting. Although he had said something similar before, this was not a buffet line, this was a work line. My pathetic audition was a disaster, and I could never have gotten the job after what I gave them.
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/dschultz/2009/03/16/the-liberal-bastille/
Better to read books, study the constitution, visit with friends, engage in physical activities, build something, help someone, do something rather than give them your money and let them manipulate your mind and then destroy your country.
Screw Hollywood and all it stands for.
Nope case law already has limitations on the first amendment. Nice to know you are an absolutist but the jusitices never have been
That is neither funny nor cute. Are you just such a cretin that you have to throw that kind of garbage all over the place?
Just stating my opinion I have no delusions on the way things really are.
Quite.
The hypocrisy of the loony left is astounding.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.