General Discussion

eallen

(2,981 posts)

99. The court, wisely, has avoided doing that, as much as possible

Mon Sep 8, 2014, 09:38 AM

Sep 2014

Were the courts to get actively involved in saying what constitutes the press, or what constitutes a legitimate religion, that would quickly remove the wind from the sails of the 1st amendment.

The Supreme Court has recognized this.

So, for the most part, it takes just about any religious belief seriously. Even Scientology. And any corporation, individual, or group that wants to publish something counts as part of "the press."

Doing so does not mean that the court thinks companies are people. It means that it recognizes "the press" is meant to be a more expansive concept than just individuals. I.e., the 1st amendment was meant to protect not just individual speech, but also newspapers, magazines, and other outlets, that were commercial companies even at the time of the founding.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

125 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

TOMORROW THE SENATE VOTES ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT WILL OVERTURN CITIZENS UNITED [View all] marym625 Sep 2014 OP

I will call first thing in the morning. Thanks for the heads up, marym625. nt ChisolmTrailDem Sep 2014 #1

Thank you, ChisolmTrailDem!! marym625 Sep 2014 #2

k&r... spanone Sep 2014 #3

McConnell will not allow a vote. alfredo Sep 2014 #4

reading about how he wants to stop it now marym625 Sep 2014 #6

He only wants what the monied want. alfredo Sep 2014 #12

How can McConnell stop a vote? This is a serious question I have. Not flippant. dballance Sep 2014 #14

This doesn't answer your question marym625 Sep 2014 #19

Reid still controls the Senate. He can allow a vote. dballance Sep 2014 #8

I don't think it will be stopped marym625 Sep 2014 #11

It will need a supermajority, even if McConnell doesn't filibuster. I don't see where one alfredo Sep 2014 #18

Yes, you are correct. It would require a supermajority. dballance Sep 2014 #20

I don't like wedge issues, but preventing an oligarchy isn't just a wedge issue. It is alfredo Sep 2014 #22

They dont fear the Kochs, they fear having to work to hide the bribe money where as cstanleytech Sep 2014 #32

I think the Kochs are like other congressional owners, when they buy a pol, they want alfredo Sep 2014 #74

K&R& Done LiberalElite Sep 2014 #5

Kick! CALL CALL CALL! grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #7

signed and shared on my FB page. thanks. mulsh Sep 2014 #9

AWESOME! marym625 Sep 2014 #16

K&R stage left Sep 2014 #10

Good for you for trying marym625 Sep 2014 #13

You mean RoverSuswade Sep 2014 #97

That's just scary! marym625 Sep 2014 #110

Thanks for posting, did it! n/t RKP5637 Sep 2014 #15

I wonder how many Dems will vote no vi5 Sep 2014 #17

McConnell will filibuster. alfredo Sep 2014 #21

And many will breathe a sigh of relief... vi5 Sep 2014 #24

They'll still have to go on recod on the cloture vote Jim Lane Sep 2014 #37

That would be the smartest route, but still many will be alfredo Sep 2014 #40

I think that's exactly what will happen marym625 Sep 2014 #47

It already needs 67 votes to pass Reter Sep 2014 #62

I oppose any amendment that could ban a book from being published Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #23

The amendment specifically states marym625 Sep 2014 #26

Then it's self-defeating claptrap. X_Digger Sep 2014 #84

This message was self-deleted by its author marym625 Sep 2014 #102

Ah yes, the Rupert Murdoch Exemption (nt) Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #115

so what you're saying is marym625 Sep 2014 #117

+1 X_Digger Sep 2014 #83

Since I posted this marym625 Sep 2014 #91

Finally spoke with Durbin's office marym625 Sep 2014 #98

Still recieving responses marym625 Sep 2014 #103

I don't care if 100% of the population support it. Fucking with rights is always wrong. X_Digger Sep 2014 #112

Don't be ridiculous marym625 Sep 2014 #114

I disagree with Stevens on quite a few subjects. He's already spit on the 4th and 5th, and 2nd. X_Digger Sep 2014 #116

Obviously no point in us going back and forth marym625 Sep 2014 #118

No amendment that decreases rights deserves passage. Period. End of sentence. X_Digger Sep 2014 #119

I agree with what you just said marym625 Sep 2014 #121

by the way marym625 Sep 2014 #122

Heh, this isn't me angry. This is me annoyed by Udall, etc. If I thought it actually had a chance.. X_Digger Sep 2014 #123

The baby is still in the tub. :) eom marym625 Sep 2014 #124

Some further information marym625 Sep 2014 #111

We've got two great senators here (NM). Tom Udall has been a big driving force in this. Voice for Peace Sep 2014 #25

Got too many of those around marym625 Sep 2014 #27

I think it's all about people with very little self knowledge and/or self esteem, who have been made Voice for Peace Sep 2014 #41

I think it's about the money marym625 Sep 2014 #58

boils down to the same thing, I think.. the money makes them feel important and special. Voice for Peace Sep 2014 #76

You would think that they would marym625 Sep 2014 #77

the lack of self awareness and selfesteem makes one a perfect tool for brainwashing Voice for Peace Sep 2014 #78

Do you really think they believe that? marym625 Sep 2014 #79

No word tooeyeten Sep 2014 #29

who are your senators? give them a call! Voice for Peace Sep 2014 #42

martinez's best tool in NM is 770 KKOB, the limbaugh and lobos station, which would go belly up if certainot Sep 2014 #85

Good to know, I have no radio. My next door neighbor listens to Limbaugh, LOUD. Voice for Peace Sep 2014 #86

sorry to hear that. if it goes there, ask him if he can tell you anything major that limbaugh's been certainot Sep 2014 #113

Contacted my senator tooeyeten Sep 2014 #28

ohnoes, they are ubiquitous. Voice for Peace Sep 2014 #43

I thought that didn't start until after the November election marym625 Sep 2014 #46

Tom Coburn and Jim Inhofe are my states senators madokie Sep 2014 #30

Dude, I live in Idaho, Mbrow Sep 2014 #36

Wanna bet that the republicans wont support it as they dont want the bribe money to dry up? cstanleytech Sep 2014 #31

Unfortunately marym625 Sep 2014 #33

True but the % of republicans is far higher I'm willing to wager. cstanleytech Sep 2014 #34

I will take that wager marym625 Sep 2014 #45

I would think that's probably a given. stage left Sep 2014 #38

I will call "Terrible" Ted Cruz and John "Cornholio" Coryn first thing tomorrow! Dustlawyer Sep 2014 #35

What will you call them? hobbit709 Sep 2014 #89

I've only told them a million times. Portman won't vote for anything against the GOP party line. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #39

K&R. JDPriestly Sep 2014 #44

K&R 99Forever Sep 2014 #48

So proud to have Tom Udall as my Senator! Dont call me Shirley Sep 2014 #49

Surely, that was a great thing to do marym625 Sep 2014 #50

Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Sep 2014 #51

Thank you marym625 Sep 2014 #52

I just sent this to Tammy Baldwin and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin. Half-Century Man Sep 2014 #53

NICE! marym625 Sep 2014 #54

Done. Thanks for posting. nm rhett o rick Sep 2014 #55

Thank you marym625 Sep 2014 #56

K&R n/t lordsummerisle Sep 2014 #57

My guys would already vote yes: Blumenthal and Murphy from CT lindysalsagal Sep 2014 #59

Thank you! marym625 Sep 2014 #64

We need a praying smilie. Brigid Sep 2014 #60

Ha! is there a suggestion board? marym625 Sep 2014 #65

Well, I suppose I could put it in ATA. Brigid Sep 2014 #67

KICK!! CALLING....... Segami Sep 2014 #61

Cool! marym625 Sep 2014 #66

K & R !!! WillyT Sep 2014 #63

K&R! Omaha Steve Sep 2014 #68

I think independent progressive groups can seize this opportunity to call out senators in ads. alp227 Sep 2014 #69

This message was self-deleted by its author marym625 Sep 2014 #71

I agree marym625 Sep 2014 #72

too bad they will not go for the brass ring and revoke corporate personhood. Nobel_Twaddle_III Sep 2014 #70

That needs to happen too marym625 Sep 2014 #73

Yeah, good luck with that. As long as there are 41 NO votes nothing will happen. LoisB Sep 2014 #75

34 no votes kills a constitutional amendment. tritsofme Sep 2014 #80

signed and shared TeamPooka Sep 2014 #81

Thanks! marym625 Sep 2014 #82

Section 3 guarantees it will have zero impact on Citizens United eallen Sep 2014 #87

I remember a political science professor Liberalynn Sep 2014 #92

OK, well then the amendment reduces to the statement "This sentence is false". yodermon Sep 2014 #108

For those of you wanting the exact text of the Amendment Fortinbras Armstrong Sep 2014 #88

Thanks marym625 Sep 2014 #90

As stated above Liberalynn Sep 2014 #93

The court, wisely, has avoided doing that, as much as possible eallen Sep 2014 #99

Could this impact DU's ability to actually exist? yodermon Sep 2014 #107

It could, yes. Our TOS kinda falls afoul of that last quoted sentence. n/t X_Digger Sep 2014 #120

Done! gollygee Sep 2014 #94

This could only pass Into law in a country that has a government which actually represents the world wide wally Sep 2014 #95

The Patriot Act was our downfall marym625 Sep 2014 #96

Done! nt NorthCarolina Sep 2014 #100

Thank you for the reminder. sabrina 1 Sep 2014 #101

There's no way the Repugs wil repeal this. lark Sep 2014 #104

True marym625 Sep 2014 #105

In GA I've got Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss .. like they're going to vote to repeal .. HA HA YOHABLO Sep 2014 #106

That is funny! marym625 Sep 2014 #109

I don't know if anyone will see this marym625 Sep 2014 #125