The pseudonym "Philo Vaihinger" has been abandoned. All posts have been and are written by me, Joseph Auclair.

Thursday, August 1, 2013

Who can deny these campaign limits are, and are meant to be, limits on speech?


The first amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

And on what constitutionally specified power of congress does the legitimacy of such laws purport to rest, anyway?

Liberal limits on conservative speech are unconstitutional.

Democratic limits on Republican speech are unconstitutional.

An interesting contrast with Republican gerrymandering and voter ID laws, both of which are constitutional.

Update, 04022014.

On second thought, limits on what you can pay others to say or print are not limits on what anyone can, in his own person, say or print.

This is not a true First Amendment issue.

Federal limits are not unconstitutional on that account, nor does the First bind the states in any case.

On the other hand, federal authority for imposing such limits comes under the commerce clause.

So there you have it.

2 comments:

  1. I know this has nothing to do with your post, but I had to thank you for the little note you wrote about that absurd article on The American "Conservative" (Conservative my derrière!) on a book written by big-time Leftie Nick Turse. My husband, an extremely knowledgeable American, said he felt sick to his stomach at all the propaganda perpetrated and by a so-called "Conservative" medium! I wonder why people don't write a book about the atrocities and the lies perpetrated by the Vietcong!

    ReplyDelete
  2. PS: I wrote two comments, pointing those things out; they were never published.

    ReplyDelete