Ro Khanna Says Voting for the Laken Riley Act is Disqualifying for Any...
The Economist Offers Their Not-At-All Hot Take on Spencer Pratt
Sam Stein Thinks It’s Low Stakes to Vote for a Senator on Whether...
Platner Campaign Posts Video of Dem Candidate's Wife Making a Fresh 'Clean Up...
Woman Fired After Praying to ‘MAGA Lord Jesus’ to Make Pam Bondi’s Throat...
Scott Wiener Asks Who Would Campaign by Demonizing Children Who Just Want to...
WaPo: Pentagon Moving to Recruit Hundreds of Troops to Be Spectators at White...
New Yorker: In Nation of MAGA Hats, ‘Patriotism Just Isn’t Cool Anymore’
CBS News: Jill Biden Supported Hunter’s Pardon Because She Didn’t Want Him in...
Scar Issue: Dems ‘Forget’ Biden's Post-Op Topless Trans Activists at WH While Blasting...
DHS Secretary Ratioed for Thanking NJ Governor for Her Cooperation in Restoring Law...
Atlantic Drops 'Do Better Than Platner' Bomb as Shipwreckedcrew Warns: DNC Prepping Anothe...
Rioters Dismantle the ‘First Amendment Barriers’ Set Up by New Jersey State Police
Dem Senate Hopeful Graham Platner’s Wife Flagged His Sexually Explicit Texts With Other...
The Bulwark's Tim Miller Asks for More Posts About James Talarico's Hot Vegan...

Kamala Harris campaign now in open war against the First Amendment, accuses Trump of yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded theater

In a follow up to her tweet last night, failing presidential candidate Kamala Harris posted a letter she sent to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey asking him to suspend President Donald Trump:

Advertisement

And if that’s not bad enough, here’s her national press secretary declaring open war against the First Amendment:

So Tulsi Gabbard defends free speech and that’s a problem to Team Harris?

This clown is even fighting with libs over it:

Advertisement

Using the “fire in a crowded theater” line in this context should be disqualfying. From The Atlantic in 2012, “It’s Time to Stop Using the ‘Fire in a Crowded Theater’ Quote“:

Today, despite the “crowded theater” quote’s legal irrelevance, advocates of censorship have not stopped trotting it out as thefinal word on the lawful limits of the First Amendment. As Rottman wrote, for this reason, it’s “worse than useless in defining the boundaries of constitutional speech. When used metaphorically, it can be deployed against any unpopular speech.” Worse, its advocates are tacitly endorsing one of the broadest censorship decisions ever brought down by the Court. It is quite simply, as Ken White calls it, “the most famous and pervasive lazy cheat in American dialogue about free speech.”

Even Justice Holmes may have quickly realized the gravity of his opinions in Schneck and its companion cases. Later in the same term, Holmes suddenly dissented in a similar case, Abrams vs. United States, which sent Russian immigrants to jail under the Espionage Act. It would become the first in a long string of dissents Holmes and fellow Justice Louis Brandies would write in defense of free speech that collectively laid the groundwork for Court decisions in the 1960s and 1970s that shaped the First Amendment jurisprudence of today.

In what would become his second most famous phrase, Holmes wrote in Abrams that the marketplace of ideas offered the best solution for tamping down offensive speech: “The ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas — that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out.”

Advertisement

It’s time for Kamala Harris to drop out.

***

Related:

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement