...Kagan say it might? 1st Amndmnt? Do citizens have a right in the United States to organize & pool our resources together in order to make a concerted effort to convey a political message for the purposes of affecting elections and/or affecting public policy decisions?
Does Elena Kagan believe in this right?
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/hentoff051910.php3
~~~~~~~~~~~~
During the oral argument, Chief Justice John Roberts asked Kagan how far the government could censor corporations' political speech: "If you say you are not going to apply (censorship) to a book (about the candidates), what about a pamphlet?"
This is how the former Dean of the Harvard Law School and a former clerk of Justice Thurgood Marshall, an ardent protector of free speech, answered: "I think a pamphlet would be different. A pamphlet is pretty classic electioneering." The government, therefore, could penalize such corporate speech.
I have long been reporting on the need for more Americans, very much including members of Congress, to learn how we became the United States of America, including the impact of such pre-Revolution pamphlets as Tom Paine's "Common Sense" and "The Crisis"; John Dickinson's "Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania"; and Samuel Adams' "The Rights of the Colonists," among others of his pamphlets that contributed to John Adams saying: "Without the character of Samuel Adams, the true history of the American Revolution can never be written."
Responding to Solicitor General Kagan's need of an education in civics, Chief Justice Roberts, in his concurring opinion in the Citizens United case, said: "The (Obama) government urges us in this case to uphold a direct prohibition on political speech. It asks us to embrace a theory of the First Amendment that would allow censorship not only of television and radio broadcasts, but of pamphlets."
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Does Elena Kagan believe in this right?
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/hentoff051910.php3
~~~~~~~~~~~~
During the oral argument, Chief Justice John Roberts asked Kagan how far the government could censor corporations' political speech: "If you say you are not going to apply (censorship) to a book (about the candidates), what about a pamphlet?"
This is how the former Dean of the Harvard Law School and a former clerk of Justice Thurgood Marshall, an ardent protector of free speech, answered: "I think a pamphlet would be different. A pamphlet is pretty classic electioneering." The government, therefore, could penalize such corporate speech.
I have long been reporting on the need for more Americans, very much including members of Congress, to learn how we became the United States of America, including the impact of such pre-Revolution pamphlets as Tom Paine's "Common Sense" and "The Crisis"; John Dickinson's "Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania"; and Samuel Adams' "The Rights of the Colonists," among others of his pamphlets that contributed to John Adams saying: "Without the character of Samuel Adams, the true history of the American Revolution can never be written."
Responding to Solicitor General Kagan's need of an education in civics, Chief Justice Roberts, in his concurring opinion in the Citizens United case, said: "The (Obama) government urges us in this case to uphold a direct prohibition on political speech. It asks us to embrace a theory of the First Amendment that would allow censorship not only of television and radio broadcasts, but of pamphlets."
~~~~~~~~~~~~