December 4, 2006
Stephen Breyer, Judicial Activist
Posted by Dave Blount at December 4, 2006 10:29 AM
High among the many reasons it is critical to keep Democrats out of the White House is the activist nature of the liberal ideologues they appoint to the Supreme Court. As he demonstrated on Fox News Sunday yesterday, Clinton pick Stephen Breyer is a case in point.
According to judicial activists like Breyer, it doesn't matter what the Founding Fathers said, it only matters what they meant, or would have meant if they were 21st century liberals. Breyer sees the Supremes as "the boundary patrol," charged with the duty of making sure that "no one gets too powerful" — that is, no one other than themselves.
Here's what Breyer has to say about freedom of speech:
Do you know what it means? Basically. But you don't know its entire content, and it doesn't tell you itself. Those words, "the freedom of speech," "Congress shall pass no law abridging the freedom of speech." Neither they, the founders, nor those words tell you how to apply it to the Internet.
Since the Founding Fathers didn't know about the Internet, the Constitution doesn't apply to it, except to the extent Breyer says it does.
This highly flexible conception of free speech allowed Breyer to vote to uphold the blatantly unconstitutional abomination known as McCain–Feingold campaign finance reform. Breyer's tortured justification is that by allowing someone with a lot of money to exercise his right to free speech by donating it as he sees fit, we are allowing him to "drown out" the free speech of people who don't have a lot of money.
By the same deranged reasoning, if there were two guys who wanted to express their opinions at Speakers' Corner in Hyde Park — one of whom had saved his money to buy a soapbox to stand on and one of whom hadn't — it would be in the interests of free speech for the government to confiscate the soapbox.
On a tip from Breyers Fantasy Land.