Wait ... Did they just say UNANIMOUS???

Yup, that's right. The Supremes just made a unanimous decision. All nine justices of the Supreme Court of the United States just agreed on something.

When is the last time THAT happened?? Actually, so far in 2024 it has happened quite a bit. Over 80% of cases so far this term have been unanimous. You didn't know that, did you? Not that consensus by itself is evaluative of function, but I think the Court is working fairly well here.

So what was this most recent case about, you ask? It was about my favorite subject of all: The Freedom of Speech (expression) and more specifically the prohibition against any government infringement on the People's pre-existing Right to Free Expression.

Specifically, in this case, the NRA was "harmed" as a result of actions taken by the State of New York. Those actions were taken openly by the State because it did not like the politic expression coming from the NRA, specifically it's stance in favor of the individual right to keep and bear arms.

And guess who took up the NRA's case and argued it before the Supremes?? I hope you're sitting down for this: The ACLU. Yup, the legal bastion of the left took up the right to free speech of the flag bearer of the right. No wonder the Supremes were unanimous here.

I've written often on here about the fundamental right of all people to free expression unimpeded by government interference.

And I've asked you several times if you support the right to free speech. My litmus test to supporting this fundamental right is this: Do you support and defend the right of people with whom you vehemently disagree to speak their ideas no matter how strongly you disagree?? Or do you seek to silence the opposition?

Well, the ACLU defended the NRA's right to free speech.
Justice Sotomayor voted for and defended the decision.

What about you? Do you support and defend the fundamental right of everyone across the political spectrum to free expression??

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Elessar · 26-30, M

Regardless of the case, it's unanimous solely because the NRA benefits of this ruling; had the roles been reversed here, this would've been a 6-4 ruling at the very best, or even 4-6. Change my mind.

This only proves that democrat leaning judges can be impartial. It says absolutely nothing about conservative judges, who in other cases abundantly demonstrated to be incapable of that. :/

OliRos · 22-25, F

@Elessar That's an interesting comment on the court but irrelevant to the discussion of free speech.

Elessar · 26-30, M

@OliRos Well, if free speech protection is selectively enforced, there's no such thing as a universal right to freedom of speech. That was my point.

sarabee1995 · 26-30, FVIP

@Elessar If you followed the Roberts Court (or review it's decisions if you haven't), you'll find that Judge Roberts has swung both ways with regard to the political winds. And 84% of the cases so far this year have been unanimous. Some of those have swung right and others have swung left.

OliRos · 22-25, F

@Elessar I don't think there is any such thing as a universal right to free speech.

The specific right granted under the US Constitution is enforced within the jurisdiction of the Federal Support Court.

Members of SCOTUS are political appointees with lifetime tenure. They apply their judgments selectively to all cases brought before them.

sarabee1995 · 26-30, FVIP

@OliRos Of course you don't acknowledge the existence of universal Rights! You are studying Law in the UK. This distinction is the foundational reason why we are no longer one country. My forebears believed in the universal rights of all people and yours did not.

And again, please consult the first amendment to the US Constitution. There is no Right to Free Speech granted or bestowed there. There is only a prohibition placed upon the government infringement of the pre-existing Right to Free Speech.

OliRos · 22-25, F

@sarabee1995 I do understand your standpoint and accept your correction on the Constitution. Sloppy expression on my part.

However, I would be interested to see how you arrive at and define a "pre-existing Right to Free Speach".

sarabee1995 · 26-30, FVIP

@OliRos Well, the idea of an individual right to free expression without fear of governmental retribution dates back to the Greeks. The concept of the "Natural Man (person)" possessing pre-existing rights independent of any government grant was fleshed out by John Locke. And of course my country's Declaration of separation from yours attributed the fundamental rights of the People to the Divine.

Of course, that Declaration does not have the force of law here or anywhere. It was simply a statement made to George and to the world out of respect for the opinions of mankind stating the reasons for our separation.

But that concept of pre-existing rights did make it into our Constitution. Not a single fundamental right is granted by the US federal government. Not a single one.

Instead, We the People granted limited authority to our government to manage the affairs of State and prohibited it from infringing on certain of our rights.

OliRos · 22-25, F

@sarabee1995

Well, the idea of an individual right to free expression without fear of governmental retribution dates back to the Greeks.

So it is a human construct.

And of course my country's Declaration of separation from yours attributed the fundamental rights of the People to the Devine.

As is the "divine".

In its roots and its attribution, the fundamental right relies on a human construct.

Which is fine and does not diminish it any way but at least recognises honestly that it is something we (humanity) grant to ourselves. It is not something that exists outside our recognition of it.

We the People granted limited authority to our government to manage the affairs of State and prohibited it from infringing on certain of our rights.

Bottom up, as opposed to top down, government. Yes, there is a lot to be said for the idea that authority flows from the people to the government rather than the other way around.

sarabee1995 · 26-30, FVIP

@OliRos Typo corrected.

I don't know to what the Greeks attributed the right, be it a human or Divine construct.