Quote of the Day
My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the federal government in significant ways in the most important time periods.
…
And so I guess some might say that the government actually has a duty to take steps to protect the citizens of this country, and you seem to be suggesting that that duty cannot manifest itself in the government encouraging or even pressuring platforms to take down harmful information.
…
So can you help me? Because I’m really – I’m really worried about that because you’ve got the First Amendment operating in an environment of threatening circumstances from the government’s perspective, and you’re saying that the government can’t interact with the source of those problems.
Ketanji Brown Jackson
Justice of SCOTUS
March 18, 2024
Judge Jackson’s ‘chilling’ First Amendment comments leave Jonathan Turley ‘very concerned’ (msn.com)
I’m reminded of something I thought the NRA had repeatedly published. But I can’t find it now. The closest I could find was this:
You know why there’s a Second Amendment? In case the government fails to follow the first one.
It would be best for everyone if SCOTUS understands this. As the people of Scotland are learning, if not vigorously defended, free speech is easily lost:
The police and the CPS have agreed the following definition for identifying and flagging hate crimes:
“Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice, based on a person’s disability or perceived disability; race or perceived race; or religion or perceived religion; or sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation or transgender identity or perceived transgender identity.”
There is no legal definition of hostility so we use the everyday understanding of the word which includes ill-will, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment and dislike.
As the world around us is being forcefully dumbed down. There were certain people that didn’t need any work at all.
Presenting, Ketanji B. Jackson.
Fully lacking in reading comprehension skills outside the politics of communism.
Forty lashes for anyone in the senate that voted for its confirmation.
She is the embodiment of a “humiliation ritual”, writ large over a conquered people.
This senile liar will be your dictator, and this braying ass of a human will be your law giver.
You will own nothing, you will eat the bugs, and you will work and die as we please.
We don’t have and country anymore. Were just desperately pretending we don’t live in Haiti yet.
“This system was made for a moral, and religious people. It is wholly unsuited to the any other. We’re finding that one out the hard way.
When I first read what the Supreme Court Justice who shall not be named said, I really wondered why in all the hubbub that there was no one who expressed the need for impeachment proceedings. To me it is inconceivable that a jurist that is supposed to be knowledgeable of the Constitution, in order to protect it according to the oath taken, could, with a straight face utter such an asinine statement. Since the whole purpose of the Constitution is to define the operating limits of the Federal Government, there should be no question that this jurist is in open defiance of the law of the land and as such should have no place on the Supreme Court. If she wants to express such opinions, she should do so as a private citizen, taking advantage of the 1st Amendment, not as a sitting Supreme Court Justice! If factions of the government feel that an issue is so important to the people of the country, then make a persuasive case to the people. If a persuasive case cannot be presented, then you know all that is needed to be known about the effort to use the situation as an excuse for implementing tyrannical control.
It’s been true for centuries that the vast majority of politicians, in all three or more branches of the Federal government, have no respect whatsoever for the Constitution.
“Justice” Jackson is somewhat more blunt about her hatred of the Constitution, but the actual substance of her views is neither new nor unusual.
And yes, impeachment (on a charge of perjury) is obviously needed, but unfortunately will not happen.
That faint noise in the background, barely discernible, is the ratchet clicking a few more steps toward CWII.
Yaaa, it’s becoming pretty obvious they don’t want us around anymore, isn’t it?
The sad part is they can’t live without us. But, sorry bitches, our house, our stuff, our rules.
No more squatters. That’s all K. Brown and communist fellow travelers/useful idiots are. Squatters.
It seems to me an excellent way of looking at them.
They think, death to kulaks? Ya, same to squatters.
The Kulaks won’t go quietly this time. No more waiting in fear as the Cheka comes in the building and walks noisily up the stairs with every family waiting in terror. If it isn’t anything more than a fireplace poker or Grandma’s cane, the Useful Idiots won’t wait passively to be taken to the Lubyanka and then to the cattle cars to Kolyma.
In the camps themselves the saying when Solzhenitsyn “attended” was “You today, me tomorrow. I think once the mask falls completely, the saying will be “take one with you”, or if things get bad, “Me today, you tomorrow.”
Mr. Wilson:
I think, sir, that you are somewhat mistaken, as regards your statement “No more waiting in fear as the Cheka comes in the building…”.
My perception is that “fear” is the one emotion no one seems to be suffering under; “anger,” “frustration,” “resentment,” “rage,” and others, yes. But fear? No.
There is, however, still “the waiting,” not for the arrival of the Cheka but for the final provocation, one severe enough that it cannot be ignored and requires immediate redress.
At which point “waiting” will be replaced by “ruthless pursuit” until the issue is fully and thoroughly resolved.
Congratulations! This was your 3,000<th comment here.
Thank you!
This is your 3,000th comment here! Thank you for all your contributions to the discussions.
I think the irony or perhaps Sardony of this “Justice” seat-holder’s statement about hamstringing Leviathan is that for most of the Twentieth Century the lawyers of her philosophical bent argued ceaselessly for a First Amendment that was interpreted as broadly as possible to in fact hamstring the government, Lawyers who took Constitutional law in the two decades before I sat through the garble recited the nostrum that the remedy for bad speech was more speech, so the community of ideas could sort things out. Now apparently, since we have an inordinate number of justices and judges at all levels who do not believe in a libertarian view of the law, the First Amendment is a battle ground for balancing the needs of the order-keeping state versus the needs of the lying masses,which cannot be allowed to hamstring the need for order and continuity of governance. .
Jackson was given the appointment to the bench…by Pedo Joes handlers…. because this is EXACTLY what she thinks of the Constitution and our RIGHTS.
And given the remotest chance the left will replace ALL the other justices who don’t think that way with ones who do.