General discussion

Free Speech on trial in America

Discussion is locked

Reply to: Free Speech on trial in America
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: Free Speech on trial in America
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
- Collapse -
"Didn't even get a trial" ??

I can only presume you are completely ignorant of the legal system in America.
They had every oppertunity allowed to them.

- Collapse -
RE: They had every oppertunity allowed to them.


The courts aren't set up to make a judgment.

there was no authority of any court to make a decision.

"No specific authority instructs this court (let alone a reasonable public official) how to treat the ejection of a silent attendee from an official speech based on the attendee?s protected expression outside the speech area,? wrote Judge Paul Kelly of the Tenth US Circuit Court of Appeals.

- Collapse -
As per your SOP,

You missed/left out something:

"A federal judge threw the lawsuit out. A federal appeals court panel agreed. The panel, in a 2-1 decision, said there was no ?clearly established? constitutional right not to be excluded from a speech by the president because of a bumper sticker on the car in which they arrived."

- Collapse -

. the ruling by a judge that all or a portion (one or more of the causes of action) of the plaintiff's lawsuit is terminated (thrown out) at that point without further evidence or testimony. This judgment may be made before, during or at the end of a trial, when the judge becomes convinced that the plaintiff has not and cannot prove his/her/its case. This can be based on the complaint failing to allege a cause of action, on a motion for summary judgment, plaintiff's opening statement of what will be proved, or on some development in the evidence by either side which bars judgment for the plaintiff. The judge may dismiss on his own or upon motion by the defendant. The plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss a cause of action before or during trial if the case is settled, if it is not provable or trial strategy dictates getting rid of a weak claim. A defendant may be "dismissed" from a lawsuit, meaning the suit is dropped against that party.

- Collapse -
Whether it's constitutional or not

it's typical of Bush. He only want people around him that agreed with him. That's dangerous in anybody, esp. a leader.


- Collapse -
Of course,

Only Bush did/does that

- Collapse -
- Collapse -
(NT) Bingo
- Collapse -
I didn't say he was the only one

What I was saying is the great ones don't.


- Collapse -
- Collapse -
You're going with the "But he does it too!" defense?

Is it right or wrong to do that? The answer is not dependent on who is doing it.

- Collapse -
(NT) Who's he
- Collapse -
I'd imagine 'he'....

includes all Presidents. It's big news every 4 years of the people that are kept out of the party conventions as well. The fact of the mater is that everyone here is entitled to free speech but they're not entitled to express it wherever they want.

- Collapse -
Can you back that up?

Got any proof? Got any evidence?

CNET Forums

Forum Info