Defending the family

Share on MeWe Share on Gab E-mail article

Supreme Court Refuses To Protect Children And Women And will now turn to more "mischief"

The New American reports:

As the Supreme Court opens its review of pending cases this week, there is substantial risk of constitutional mischief in many of them.

The court will be ruling on the constitutionality of Obama's recess appointments dating back to 2012, the constitutionality of the present caps on individual political contributions, the constitutionality of restricting protesters at abortion clinics, the constitutionality of ObamaCare's mandate that employers provide insurance coverage for contraception, the authority of police to search the cellphones of people they arrest, and whether or not the practice of the city council of the tiny town of Greece, New York, to open its legislative sessions with prayer is constitutional.

Court Might Restrict THE FIRST AMENDMENT!

.................In McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court has a chance to revisit its decision in Buckley v. Valeo in 1976, in which it invalidated several provisions of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 that restricted political contributions, but let stand a restriction on individual contributions for fear of "corruption or its appearance" reflecting the danger of a "quid pro quo" deal whereby political influence is bought through the support of a candidate who agrees to taking "certain actions in exchange for the contribution." Two present members of the court, Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, have argued that this decision should be overturned on the basis of the First Amendment, stating that such contributions are expressions of free speech guaranteed by that amendment.

However the Supreme Court rules, the First Amendment is at risk unless the court carefully and clearly defines the line between the support for a candidate and the ownership of him.