Why Worry What The Constitution Says


Linda Greenhouse, New York Times court reporter to the elites, starts her review of the BCRA decision this way:

The Supreme Court that upheld the new campaign finance law on Wednesday was a pragmatic court, concerned less with the fine points of constitutional doctrine than with the real-world context and consequences of the intensely awaited decision.

[emphasis added]

So, let me get this right. According to this, the Court didn’t consider what the Constitution says about Congress making no law infringing on speech. Rather, the Court just thought about what felt right in the real world.

Ah, modern justice at the hands of Sandra Dee. We should all be reassured. Next up — hate speech laws are constitutional, because it just feels right.

About the author

Erick Erickson
By Erick Erickson

Erick Erickson

Get in touch

You can check me out across the series of tubes known as the internet.