Obama SCOTUS Pick Hostile to Free Speech.

This is the pic published in the Wall St. Journal which got the libs howling that WSJ was implying Kagan's gay. Hmmm, I thought the Left approve of homosexuality?

Here is some new information that one of our eagle-eyed readers has found. Along with what we have brought you so far on this wonderful choice for our nation’s Highest Court, we thought this might help punch up her resume a bit. Hey, that’s what we’re here for.
We’re speechless, and we’re not the only ones…….
Supreme Court: Elena Kagan’s thin paper trail was supposed to be an asset. But the confirmation of Obama’s nominee may focus on one position it’s clear she holds: that banning political speech can be constitutional.
‘The government’s answer has changed.” That was how Solicitor General Kagan began her frantic damage control during a second round of oral arguments last September in the Citizens United case, which Kagan and the U.S. government ultimately lost and the First Amendment won.
Her deputy, Malcolm Stewart, in March of last year said the government had constitutional powers extending to banning books to limit corporate political influence.
As a result, the justices ordered a second round of arguments last fall to get into broader free speech questions.
For that, Kagan stepped into the fray herself, telling the justices that the government had reconsidered its position and conceding that banning books would elicit a strong court challenge.
So Chief Justice John Roberts asked her, “If you say that you are not going to apply it to a book, what about a pamphlet?”
“I think a pamphlet would be different,” Kagan responded. “A pamphlet is pretty classic electioneering,” and so the government could restrict such political speech.
Who you are should determine how much you can say — that is the admitted philosophy held by this high-court nominee.
According to the president, alluding to Kagan’s role in the Citizens United case as he announced her as his Supreme Court choice on Monday, “powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens.”
But who decides who those powerful interests are and how much they can say?
The most powerful interest of all does: the government….
To read the rest of story Pls use link below
H/T Our New Friend Richard.

Please follow and like us:

Leave a Reply

Notify of

Awright shutting people up for a “higher good” is okay for her! (Damn, for a minute, I thought I was in America.)


“powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens.”
Hey hypocrit, would this apply to the Soros machine as well? Yeah, highly doubt that…