Skip to main content

View Diary: Fort Knox nixes Nugent performance (276 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I see (0+ / 0-)

    So you think that it is dicta regarding whether there was a clearly established constitutional  rule prohibiting punishing for speech by a governmental entity?

    Let me spell it out for you, the motion to dismiss was on qualified immunity grounds.

    The argument that what I quoted was not clearly established constitutional law was rejected. THAT was the holding of the case.

    For those of you who are not lawyers, the dicta is what CSA cites,

    The holding is what I cited.

    Beyond that, the issue to me is not whether the First Amendment was violated by the base commander's action, but whether it was implicated.

    It clearly was.

    You r comment misunderstands the purpose of my quote and misunderstands the HOLDING in El Dia v. Rosello.

    But hell, read Umbehr if you want further understanding.

    Finally, you know who likes to argue for "governmental speech rights" don't you? People who like to gag doctors from telling women about their options with regard to pregnancy. See Rust v. Sullivan.

    Your comment is incorrect in most particulars about the El Dia case..

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (160)
  • Community (83)
  • Baltimore (80)
  • Freddie Gray (59)
  • Bernie Sanders (58)
  • Civil Rights (51)
  • Elections (40)
  • Culture (36)
  • Hillary Clinton (33)
  • Media (33)
  • 2016 (29)
  • Racism (29)
  • Law (29)
  • Education (25)
  • Labor (25)
  • Environment (24)
  • Politics (23)
  • Republicans (23)
  • Barack Obama (21)
  • Police (19)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site