For John, BLUF: The US Supreme Court, after the terrible Schenck v United States decision, has tended toward protection of speech. Nothing to see here; just move along.
Law Professor Ann Althouse blogs about Free Speech and Due Process, here.
The post refers to a 1940 US Supreme Court ruling, Cantwell v Connecticut. (I think there is a typo in the report.)
Professor Althouse highlights:
In the realm of religious faith, and in that of political belief, sharp differences arise. In both fields the tenets of one man may seem the rankest error to his neighbor. To persuade others to his own point of view, the pleader, as we know, at times resorts to exaggeration, to vilification of men who have been, or are, prominent in church or state, and even to false statement. But the people of this nation have ordained, in the light of history, that, in spite of the probability of excesses and abuses, these liberties are, in the long view, essential to enlightened opinion and right conduct on the part of the citizens of a democracy.The Bold is the Professor's.
Free Speech. It is a wonderful thing and needs to be preserved. Everywhere.
NOTE for Gerry:: It isn't about politics, it is about the US Constitution.
Regards — Cliff