The Supreme Court continues its pushback on women’s rights with the gun control cases Counterman v. Colorado and U.S. v. Rahimi.
Though the Court drapes its opinions in the language of liberalism—of free speech and rights—the result is the same: The Constitution somehow becomes the enemy of popular laws devised to protect women. The only way to push back against these Court rulings is for Congress to take the steps necessary to affirm the Equal Rights Amendment., Billy Raymond Counterman, sent at least hundreds of Facebook messages to C.W., a local musician in Denver whom he had never met.
And then there were the death threats: “Fuck off permanently”; “Staying in cyber life is going to kill you”; and “You’re not being good for human relations. Die.”reversed Counterman’s conviction Though the Court drapes its opinions in the language of liberalism—of free speech and rights—the result is the same: The Constitution somehow becomes the enemy of popular laws devised to protect women.A reasonable observer might ask, “Don’t we want to chill threatening speech? Why would the Court protect stalking? Didn’t Counterman abuse his right of speech?”
When the Violence Against Women Act was first proposed, the American Civil Liberties Union opposed it, again based on speech . As many legal scholars now recognize, the First Amendment has become a sword, not a shield—insulating harm, not shielding dissent., Justice Sonia Sotomayor explained that stalking is by definition, like domestic violence; each individual instance alone may seem trivial, but when put together they can terrorize.
Malaysia Latest News, Malaysia Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
ProPublica Report Questions Clarence Thomas’ Impartiality In Upcoming Supreme Court CaseSee multiple perspectives from ProPublica, Newsweek, and Fox News (Online News) at AllSides.com.
Read more »
Newsom defends 'paralyzed' California officials in asking Supreme Court to intervene on homeless encampmentsGov. Gavin Newsom asked the Supreme Court to intervene, claiming California city leaders face an 'unsurmountable roadblock' in clearing homeless encampments.
Read more »
Supreme Court to deliberate on the ambiguity of 'And' in criminal sentencing lawIn particular, the justices will be examining a so-called safety valve provision that is meant to spare low-level, nonviolent drug dealers who agree to plead guilty and cooperate with prosecutors from having to face often longer mandatory sentences.
Read more »
Justice Samuel Alito Is Just Begging for Regulations on the Supreme CourtHis defiance over ethics concerns only drives home their importance, and how much more robust standards need to be applied to the high court.
Read more »
| The Founders were wrong to grant Supreme Court justices life tenureThere are no easy solutions to the problem, but it is clearly a problem.
Read more »
Following the money: How the Washington Supreme Court changed how the state funds educationIn what became known as 2012’s 'McCleary Decision,' the Washington Supreme Court ruled the state was not properly funding education.
Read more »