Connect with us

Nation

SCOTUS: Speaking your mind is still allowed in America

Published

on

Supreme Court

[brid autoplay=”true” video=”691115″ player=”23886″ title=”Rep.%20Biggs%20The%20fight%20for%20freedom%20must%20be%20fought%20at%20the%20polls%20in%20Georgia” duration=”3296″ description=”Sara is joined by House Freedom Caucus Chairman Rep. Andy Biggs, who says the fight for freedom must be fought by voters in the upcoming Senate elections in Georgia. Biggs also slams liberal leaders who have acted as tyrants but don’t actually follow their own lockdown orders.” uploaddate=”2020-12-14″ thumbnailurl=”//cdn.brid.tv/live/partners/18168/thumb/691115_t_1607968027.png” contentUrl=”//cdn.brid.tv/live/partners/18168/sd/691115.mp4″]


By Jenny Goldsberry

The Supreme Court of the United States voted eight to one in favor of a high school cheerleader, saying it was against her first amendment rights to kick her off of the squad for using profane language off campus. The school suspended then sophomore Brandy Levy for saying “”F— school f— softball f— cheer f— everything,” in a Snapchat.

While the Mahanoy Area School District in Pennsylvania has strict regulations within the school, the justices agreed that to include students’ language off-campus is extreme. In the majority opinion, Justice Stephen Breyer wrote that a regulation that strict would “include all the speech a student utters during the full 24-hour day. That means courts must be more skeptical of a school’s efforts to regulate off-campus speech, for doing so may mean the student cannot engage in that kind of speech at all.” That effort obviously infringes on one’s right to free speech.

“It might be tempting to dismiss B. L.’s words as unworthy of the robust First Amendment protections discussed herein,” Breyer wrote. “But sometimes it is necessary to protect the superfluous in order to preserve the necessary.”

Justice Clarence Thomas was the only one who dissented. He claimed that it is the school’s have a right to discipline their students. “When students are on campus, the majority says, schools have authority in loco parentis—that is, as
substitutes of parents—to discipline speech and conduct,” Thomas wrote. The majority Justices agreed with that premise, but Thomas claimed that they were veering from precedent.

“A more searching review reveals that schools historically could discipline students in circumstances like those presented here,” Thomas wrote.

You can follow Jenny Goldsberry on Twitter @jennyjournalism.

You may like

Continue Reading

Featured

Trump: Tanks to Ukraine could escalate to use of ‘NUKES’

Published

on

ukraine tanks scaled

Former President Donald Trump stated bluntly on Truth Social,  “FIRST COME THE TANKS, THEN COME THE NUKES. Get this crazy war ended, NOW. So easy to do!”

Trump was referring to the escalation of war in Ukraine. He, like many other commentators and lawmakers, are warning that the decision to continue sending weapons – and now tanks – could potentially lead to the use of “nuclear weapons.”

It’s mission creep and it’s dangerous, they say.

Why? Because Russian President Valdimir Putin has indicated in two different speeches that he would use nuclear weapons to defend Russia, if needed. Those warnings are not just bluster but a very real possibility.

And the escalation of war is visible.

Russia launched 55 missiles strikes across Ukraine Thursday, leaving 11 dead. The strikes come one day after the United States and Germany agreed to send tanks to Ukraine in an effort to aide the country. 47 of the 55 missiles were shot down according to Ukraine’s Air Force command.

Eleven lives were lost and another 11 were injured additionally leaving 35 buildings damaged in the wake of the attacks. According to The New York Times, Denys Shmyhal, said in a post on Telegram. “The main goal is energy facilities, providing Ukrainians with light and heat,” he said.

Ukraine is now demanding that they need F-16 fighter jets. In a post on twitter Ukrainian lawmaker, Oleksiy Goncharenko said, “Missiles again over Ukraine. We need F16.”

The US has abstained from sending advanced jets in the chances that a volatile decision could foster more dangerous attacks like former President Trump’s post on Truth referred to. If the US did authorize the decision to lend Ukraine the F-16 jets Netherlands’ foreign minister, Wopke Hoekstra, would be willing to supply them. According to The New York Times, Hoekstra told Dutch lawmakers, “We are open-minded… There are no taboos.”

F-16 fighter jets are complex to work on, they are not the average aircraft that can be learned in a matter of weeks. It can take months for pilots to learn how to fly these birds. European and US officials have the concern that Ukrainian forces could potentially use the jets to fly into Russian airspace and launch attacks on Russian soil.

Western allies are trying to avoid such a provocation, because that could lead to nuclear warfare in reference to what Putin has said he would do to defend his country.

 

You may like

Continue Reading
Advertisement
-->

Trending Now

Advertisement
-->

Trending

Proudly Made In America | © 2022 M3 Media Management, LLC