The Ninth Circuit Federal Court has really crossed the line of absurdity and has given fuel to the thought that maybe Newt Gingrich was right in suggesting we abolish the Ninth and start over, because if this is its view of the Constitution, it has no right to law degrees, much less any judgeships.
Students wearing tshirts with the American flag were ordered to remove them because some students celebrating Cinco de Mayo were offended.
The shirts offended Mexican students who, the Ninth Circuit ruling states, responded by shouting, “They are being racist. F*** them white boys. Let’s f*** them up.”
According to the court, the wearing of an American flag t-shirt on Cinco de Mayo was the functional equivalent of yelling “fire” in a crowded theater.
(IBD)
So since offended Mexican students threatened violence against American students displaying an American Flag in America, the Ninth Circuit sides with the violence-threatening Mexicans.
The “fire in a crowded theater” analogy is flawed, and not because there aren’t any crowded theaters anymore. The basis of the “Fire” theory is the shouting of “fire” when there is no fire. It’s inciting a panic when no emergency exists. It’s a lie. What lie exists in the flag case?
The Ninth Circuit is in the pathetic position of punishing citizens who display the American flag and protecting people who burn it.
This is headed to the Supreme Court, and I’d pay to watch the oral arguments in this one. Scalia and popcorn, please!
Just the precedent of their decision is preposterous. Being offended plus threatening violence equals constitutionality.
Anyone offended by the income tax? See the Ninth Circuit.
Anyone offended by gay marriage? According to the Ninth Circuit, you’re only missing one ingredient from getting their support in abolishing it.
It’s hogwash.
But anyone has to question whether the Ninth Circuit is beyond saving if this is its view of one of the most treasured rights in our Bill of Rights, the freedom of speech. If there is anything basic about our Constitutional rights, it is that we may disagree with what others say, but we all defend everyone’s right to say even those things we disagree with the most.
Every newspaper editorial board should castigate the Ninth Circuit for this insipid ruling, for what it says for freedom of speech also applies to freedom of the press.
Get typing!
