Who would pick the BEST Supreme Court Justices? Bernie Or Hill ?

[onenote]

34. the reason we have a first amendment is that we cannot trust the legislature to protect speech

First, there was no law in place that would have protected the NAACP in the Claiborne Hardware case. And no law passed after the fact (which would never have happened anyway) would have helped -- it would have been too late. Moreover, the federal government can't be relied on to figure out how to protect all sorts of speakers in advance, particularly with 50 states potentially passing legislation that would restrict speech.

Second,what is and is not "the press" is a slippery concept: once upon a time, it was easy: print. But then we started to have electronic communications -- radio, TV. Are movies (and movie studios) the "press"? Is DU the "press"?

You may not realize it, but once upon a time (1952 -- not really that long ago), New York state had a law under which a censor could forbid the commercial showing of any motion picture film the censor deemed to be "sacrilegious". Joseph Burstyn, Inc., described in the court's opinion as a corporation engaged in the business of distributing motion pictures, brought suit challenging a decision by the censor revoking its license to exhibit a particular movie. The court, without ever dwelling on the fact that the plaintiff was a corporate entity, found that the NY law constituted an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech. That's why we don't rely on legislatures to protect speech.

Finally, I turn to Justice William O. Douglas, possibly the foremost defender of the first amendment in the history of the Supreme Court, for his words (joined by Justice Black), in a case involving a law that barred unions and other corporate entities from making political expenditures -- a law Douglas and Black contended was unconstitutional:

We deal here with a problem that is fundamental to the electoral process and to the operation of our democratic society. It is whether a union can express its views on the issues of an election and on the merits of the candidates, unrestrained and unfettered by the Congress. The principle at stake is not peculiar to unions. It is applicable as well to associations of manufacturers, retail and wholesale trade groups, consumers' leagues, farmers' unions, religious groups, and every other association representing a segment of American life and taking an active part in our political campaigns and discussions. It is as important an issue as has come before the Court, for it reaches the very vitals of our system of government. Under our Constitution, it is We The People who are sovereign. The people have the final say. The legislators are their spokesmen. The people determine through their votes the destiny of the nation. It is therefore important -- vitally important -- that all channels of communication be open to them during every election, that no point of view be restrained or barred, and that the people have access to the views of every group in the community.