mr t.l. davis speaks about the assault on the first amendment and a supreme justice who evidently hasn't read the bill of rights;

Oral arguments were given today on the First Amendment cases concerning the government influencing social media sites to ban and censor speech. I listened to the greater share of it, though I could not do so and remain unprovoked. I don’t know who was arguing the case on either side and didn’t particularly care, because the poor quality of arguments were remarked on even in the chat box next to the screen.

Justice Jackson probably made the worst case and exposed herself as someone who has little or no understanding of the principles of the First Amendment, but obviously subscribed to Obama’s definition of the Bill of Rights as a Bill of Negative Rights in that they told the government what it cannot do. She asked “if these people are giving false information, are suggesting that the government can do nothing about that?” (paraphrased) If you understand the ideology of these communists, there’s nothing the government can’t do and therefore the Bill of Rights negate the ability of government to do whatever it wants. Yes! Absolutely right.

First of all, I argue that the Bill of Rights contain rights the people have over the government, in spite of it, regardless of it and in that sense Obama is right, but that’s the whole point. It does tell the government what it cannot do, but that doesn’t make it a “negative right” it makes it a right of the people rather than a right of the government. It would be a right of the people, even if there were no government at all.............more.....