I just received this "hot off the press" email from WSJ:
June 25, 2007
The Supreme Court tightened limits on student speech Monday, ruling against a high-school student and his "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner. Justices also barred ordinary taxpayers from challenging a White House initiative helping religious charities get a share of federal money. The court sided with developers and the Bush administration in a dispute with environmentalists over protecting endangered species. The court also loosened restrictions on corporate- and union-funded television ads that air close to elections.
The WSJ link (possibly registration req.) and brief review over the fold.
Breaking it down:
- Supreme court reduces limit on free speech
Well, I don't like the "bong hits 4 Jesus" either but is there a reason to limit free speech because someone wrote this? I did not think so... but hey this is part of the war against drugs? Right?
Vote: 5-4
- Religious charities are allowed to get federal money without a challenge.
Separation of church and state? Hmmm... think again
Alito authored the opinion here. Vote: 5-4
- Developers and Bush administration vs. Environmnetalists? 100-0 of course!
Environment, do we have a need for that when our coffers get fuller and fuller? Bah, that's quaint... Alito wrote the opinion here as well!
Vote: 5-4
Update: Btw. the case decided on whether states can do the permitting for developers instead of the EPA and whether the Endagered Species Act will be adequately enforced. In other words: build baby build -- I can see that there are some remnants of a forest and a few swamps that can be paved over...
- Corporate funded TV ads close to elections? Hey, why not? It's a free country after all!
Oh, and the decimated unions can do that as well but guess who has more money... Btw. the case allowed an anti-abortion group to air an ad within two months of the election
Well, that is quite a score right there...
The WSJ and all the MIC (military industrial complex) would like to thank the Dems once more for keeping their powder dry! Who knows it may be needed some time. Oh, I know, they don't say it explicitly in the article but you can almost feel the smugness.
Apologies for the rant but I had to share it with someone. If diaried already -- I could not find any -- let me know and I will delete.