Thursday, November 16, 2017

SCOTUS agrees to hear 3 free-speech cases

Supreme Court Takes Free Speech Cases on Abortion, Property Rights, Gadsden Flag, and Voter ID - Ken Kuklowski, Breitbart:

November 13, 2017 - "The Supreme Court added three political-speech cases on Monday to its oral argument docket this year, granting review in one involving pro-life pregnancy centers, another where a man was arrested while criticizing his local government for corruption at a public meeting, and a third where state law prohibited a man from wearing the Gadsden flag or a voter-ID button when he went to his polling place to vote.

"The first case is National Institute of Family and Life Associates v. Becerra. California law requires licensed pro-life pregnancy resource centers to post ads for free or low-cost abortions.... NIFLA sued, arguing that the California law violates its rights under either the Free Speech Clause or the Free Exercise Clause of the Constitution’s First Amendment....

"The second case is Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach.... Fane Lozman was sounding off on local government corruption during the public comment period of a city meeting when the presiding councilmember tried to cut him off. Lozman refused to be silenced, at which time he was arrested and removed from the microphone. The question is whether this violated Lozman’s free speech rights under the Constitution....

"The third case is Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky. A Minnesota man, Andrew Cilek, entered his polling location in 2010 to vote ... wearing a T-shirt displaying the Gadsden flag ('Don’t tread on me' with a rattlesnake — popular during the American Revolution in the 1770s). He was also wearing a button that said, 'Please ID Me,' supporting voter-identification laws.

"Minnesota law forbids voters wearing anything at a polling location that contains a political message. While the Supreme Court in 1992 upheld “buffer zone” laws wherein people could not actively campaign at a polling location or try to persuade voters within a certain number of feet from the ballot box, the justices have never said that these buffer zones can exclude every message that includes a political element.

"All three cases will be heard early next year, with decisions handed down by the end of June 2018."

Read more:
'via Blog this'

No comments:

Post a Comment