JLW
Diamond Member
- Sep 16, 2012
- 15,246
- 16,140
- 2,405
Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson has claimed that the "the constitutional Bill of Rights is not a suicide pact.”
'Thomas Jefferson offered one of the earliest formulations of the sentiment, although not of the phrase. In 1803, Jefferson's ambassadors to France arranged the purchase of the Louisiana territory in conflict with Jefferson's personal belief that the Constitution did not bestow upon the federal government the right to acquire or possess foreign territory. Due to political considerations, however, Jefferson disregarded his constitutional doubts, signed the proposed treaty, and sent it to the Senate for ratification. In justifying his actions, he later wrote:
***********************************************************************
This goes to of the heart of the debate we are having now regarding Parler, Twitter, and Facebook, among others, deleting calls for insurrection and violence, and cracking down on misinformation from posters.
Now, I am for a very expansive definition of the Bill of Rights, [in contrast to conservatives who have traditionally had a narrow definition of it].
But this where this Trumpist insurrection will have unintended consequences.
Because of recent Trumper conduct and actions, the American public at large will have less freedom. There will be a backlash against the violence that you losers have fomented. Thus more restrictions on free speech and other constitutional rights.
Free speech, like liberty at large, requires that the public exercise some kind of self-restraint and personal responsibility.
Trumpers have thrown that responsibility and restraint to the curb. They have none.
Thus companies have to exercise that restraint and responsibility, which is their right.
All to our detriment.
We will all suffer because of their irresponsibility and criminal conduct.
Robert Jackson
Robert Jackson, a Supreme Court justice from 1941 to 1954, believed strongly in separation of church and state and free speech protections First Amendment.
www.mtsu.edu
'Thomas Jefferson offered one of the earliest formulations of the sentiment, although not of the phrase. In 1803, Jefferson's ambassadors to France arranged the purchase of the Louisiana territory in conflict with Jefferson's personal belief that the Constitution did not bestow upon the federal government the right to acquire or possess foreign territory. Due to political considerations, however, Jefferson disregarded his constitutional doubts, signed the proposed treaty, and sent it to the Senate for ratification. In justifying his actions, he later wrote:
A strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means"
The Constitution is not a suicide pact - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
***********************************************************************
This goes to of the heart of the debate we are having now regarding Parler, Twitter, and Facebook, among others, deleting calls for insurrection and violence, and cracking down on misinformation from posters.
Now, I am for a very expansive definition of the Bill of Rights, [in contrast to conservatives who have traditionally had a narrow definition of it].
But this where this Trumpist insurrection will have unintended consequences.
Because of recent Trumper conduct and actions, the American public at large will have less freedom. There will be a backlash against the violence that you losers have fomented. Thus more restrictions on free speech and other constitutional rights.
Free speech, like liberty at large, requires that the public exercise some kind of self-restraint and personal responsibility.
Trumpers have thrown that responsibility and restraint to the curb. They have none.
Thus companies have to exercise that restraint and responsibility, which is their right.
All to our detriment.
We will all suffer because of their irresponsibility and criminal conduct.
Last edited: