Why liberals have flip-flopped on free speech

[FakeNews]

In a remarkably honest exposé, the New York Times acknowledged Saturday that “liberals who once championed expansive First Amendment rights are now uneasy about them” ever since conservatives realized they should apply to them as well.

The Times cites First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams who noted that whereas the left once led support for First Amendment protections, they are now “at least skeptical and sometimes distraught at the level of First Amendment protection which is being afforded in cases brought by litigants on the right.”

The difference between then and now? Many of the ideas currently being protected by free speech rights run contrary to progressive ideology. Over the last 13 years, the Supreme Court “has been far more likely to embrace free-speech arguments concerning conservative speech than liberal speech,” the Times said.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-gover...hy-liberals-have-flip-flopped-on-free-speech/

 

[Rightguide]

They believe the only acceptable free speech is their own.

 

[coachdb18pointfive]

For once I would love to see these racist piece of trash stomped by men stronger than them. But they know who to pick on.

He should have been curb-stomped, with teeth spread out all over the ground.

I ask you, would a conservative saying something about, oh let’s just say for COMPARISON Hillary Clinton, would they be banned by Lit rules for advocating physical harm?

 

[BotanyBoy]

That's because they quit being liberals.

 

[coachdb18pointfive]

Maybe they all went to the nearly new store, there’s a sale on for BROWN SHIRTS!

 

[phrodeau]

Breitbart, huh? How interesting, FakeNews.

 

[Oblimo]

Scalia kept changing what qualifies as "speech" to favor the Republican agenda. That doesn't count as a good-for-the-goose-good-for-the-gander issue. Instead, Justice Scalia gave corporations free speech rights and redefined "speech" to include spending money, among other things.

Scalia was the most activist Justice ever to sit on the SCOTUS bench.

 

[WoundedKnee]

Scalia kept changing what qualifies as "speech" to favor the Republican agenda. That doesn't count as a good-for-the-goose-good-for-the-gander issue. Instead, Justice Scalia gave corporations free speech rights and redefined "speech" to include spending money, among other things.

Scalia was the most activist Justice ever to sit on the SCOTUS bench.

"Republican" agenda, or "Constitutional" agenda?

 

[HisArpy]

Scalia kept changing what qualifies as "speech" to favor the Republican agenda. That doesn't count as a good-for-the-goose-good-for-the-gander issue. Instead, Justice Scalia gave corporations free speech rights and redefined "speech" to include spending money, among other things.

Scalia was the most activist Justice ever to sit on the SCOTUS bench.

\


"Speech" isn't just words. If I flip the bird at someone without saying a word, I'm still engaging in "speech".

If that is an acceptable and acknowledged form of "speech" then so too would be monetary donations for political causes. Scalia only followed the form and format of American law, society, and understanding.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Instead, Justice Scalia gave corporations free speech rights and redefined "speech" to include spending money, among other things.

He defended corporations (peoples) free speech rights, that they've always had and the left wants so desperately to destroy.

Money is speech...it's the most powerful vote/speech anyone has.

That's why it's SO offensive to the American ideal for the government to control any more of it than is absolutely necessary.

Scalia was the most activist Justice ever to sit on the SCOTUS bench.

Hardly...he just didn't look at everything from a collectivist perspective to try and spin every bit of individual liberty into leftist oppression he could.

 

[HAL_9000]

Lets compare and contrast, shall we?

"Liberal free speech":

https://wynstep.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/squat-in.jpg

"Conservative free speech":

http://www.jerusalemonline.com/images/AAABecca/neonazirallyprotestmontana.jpg

 

[bestone4ever]

Conservatives run over innocent white girls at their rallies- in the name of free speech and assembly.

 

[nowisthetime]

Maybe if rightist extremists weren't such violent thugs, there wouldn't be a need to re-evaluate free speech, especially in this era of a hateful leader. Your leader called for protesters to be BEATEN, just for having opposing viewpoints.

Yes he did.

Face it, you cretins are very violent when you don't get your way, and apparently catty, as witnessed by the loads of vanity threads dedicated to non-rightists on this board.

Think about it, all of the atrocities committed against innocent people en masse, IN AMERICA, for being 'different' have almost always been perpetrated by rightists--Jim Crow, Neo-Nazism, etc.


Oh and if anyone brings up the post in which I wished for a beatdown against a rightist THUG harassing young innocent girls, you can kick rocks.

I TAKE NOTHING BACK.

 

[coachdb18pointfive]

Why has the non-repentant Nazi Nowisthetime NOT BEN BANNED YET?

For once I would love to see these racist piece of trash stomped by men stronger than them. But they know who to pick on.

He should have been curb-stomped, with teeth spread out all over the ground.

 

[OldJourno]

Breitbart, huh? How interesting, FakeNews.

But they got it from the New York Times!

 

[HisArpy]

Lets compare and contrast, shall we?

"Liberal free speech":

http://www.downtherabbitholemedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/riots-800-x-450-800x445.jpg

"Conservative free speech":

https://toritto.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/trump-rally11.jpg

I fixed your post to show current events.

 

[MREDME2]

https://media3.giphy.com/media/VWhWSuBUq0dos/200.gif

 

[MREDME2]

https://media2.giphy.com/media/wAsJM0y3XtoMo/200.gif

 

[nowisthetime]

Why has the non-repentant Nazi Nowisthetime NOT BEN BANNED YET?

You would think someone who was a former Air Force OFFICER and currently a COACH to a kid's sports team would have more decorum.

You better stop with your tantrum right now. You have over stepped your boundaries, with your stalking and obsession. You don't want it.

Kiss my caramel ass.

You'd like that too much.

 

[MREDME2]

Maybe if rightist extremists weren't such violent thugs, there wouldn't be a need to re-evaluate free speech, especially in this era of a hateful leader. Your leader called for protesters to be BEATEN, just for having opposing viewpoints.

Yes he did.

Face it, you cretins are very violent when you don't get your way, and apparently catty, as witnessed by the loads of vanity threads dedicated to non-rightists on this board.

Think about it, all of the atrocities committed against innocent people en masse, IN AMERICA, for being 'different' have almost always been perpetrated by rightists--Jim Crow, Neo-Nazism, etc.


Oh and if anyone brings up the post in which I wished for a beatdown against a rightist THUG harassing young innocent girls, you can kick rocks.

I TAKE NOTHING BACK.

https://media.giphy.com/media/HyteoA8MexIac/giphy.gif

 

[muycurioso]

dont forget Justice Kennedy

"Republican" agenda, or "Constitutional" agenda?

How did Justice Kennedy vote on this???

 

[muycurioso]

Maga

I fixed your post to show current events.

Hillary couldnt fill a broom closet

 

[muycurioso]

the left loved brown kids getting bombed under barrys watch

https://media2.giphy.com/media/wAsJM0y3XtoMo/200.gif

Barry won a nobel piss prize

 

[nowisthetime]

https://media.giphy.com/media/HyteoA8MexIac/giphy.gif

Shatner was so robotic! LMAO!