Via Instapundit, Ryan Sager of the New York Post writes about the absurd state of affairs where today’s U.S. Supreme Court seems to have very little interest in free speech — the kind of free speech that the Constitution actually contemplated (as opposed to kiddy-cyber-porn, which is for sure protected “speech” by the lights of today’s SCOTUS). Sager writes, in an article in Tech Central Station:
The speech 527 groups engage in is fundamental to the First Amendment, yet it is exactly this speech — not the influence behind it — that is being targeted by Congress. So much for ‘Congress shall make no law . . .
Believe it: The Internet provides the subtext to what is going on, and what is not going on, in free speech jurisprudence. The regulation of explicitly political speech is becoming more of an urgent issue than ever as the mainstream media, still dominant and influential in Washington, sees its opinion monopoly crumble thanks to the new media, including blogs.
I am inclined to think the Bush Administration is on the “right side” of this issue, albeit in its own quiet (and ice-cold-methodical) way. Even if you are a cynic about it, the free speech “side” happens to mesh ideologically and electorally with President Bush’s policy goals; the White House’s tack on this did indeed trend that way during the election, as well. Is there any hope that the White House has this on their list of issues to discuss with the prospective Supreme Court justices whose pictures are being pinned up on someone’s cubicle wall?