Excellent! Prolife group wins SCOTUS Victory

Good news: Turns out even people who oppose child murder have freedom of speech.

Bad news: That elementary proposition had to go to the Supreme Court.

"Okay, here's the thing: I'm not "try[ing] to explain black people to [you]." You asked ..."

Photos of the Kids Killed in ..."
"You can talk about whoever and whatever you want. I cannot, in fact, stop you ..."

Photos of the Kids Killed in ..."
"I have never heard of Joe the Plumber, for me and mine he is some ..."

Photos of the Kids Killed in ..."
"I don't know you so I can't talk about you personally, but I absolutely, 100% ..."

Photos of the Kids Killed in ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • entonces_99

    The Court didn’t actually hold that they had the right to issue the ads they wanted to. It merely held that their challenge to the Ohio statute could go forward. We’ll still have to wait and see how the lower courts rule on the merits of that challenge, and only then will the Supremes get to decide whether the State of Ohio can legally censor the Susan B. Anthony List’s ads.

  • wlinden

    And it is not a matter of cracking down on them for being pro-life, but an Ohio rule against making “false” statements in election campaigns. In fact, under the statute, it is illegal for politicians to tell lies about each other!

    The Cato Institute’s brief was a hilarious defense of “truthiness, insinuations and allegations” as First Amendment rights and important parts of the political process. It noted that in striking down the “Stolen Valor Act”, the court implied that outright lies are protected speech.