Public Discussion on the Supreme Court Cases (Avoid Cluttering Case Threads)

[Хahar 🤔]

Yeah, the litigous atmosphere (coupled with a hyperactive AG) is no good.

[Хahar 🤔]

Of course Marokai wants more justices now when there is a liberal in the White House.

Ah, Marokai, I didn't think it would be possible to turn this into a devious plot. Congratulations for calling it.

[Хahar 🤔]

Of course Marokai wants more justices now when there is a liberal in the White House.

Do you have anything intelligent to say....ever?

This is just like when FDR tried to stack the courts.

Except that it isn't?

[Хahar 🤔]

I don't thin that that's enough to warrant this limit on free speech.

Don't say things you're not comfortable letting out.

[Хahar 🤔]

Other than Al and Franzl it seems all of these people complaining about this were'nt here when this law was passed and don't have any memory of the problems that happened before it was passed.  If you had been guys you would know that we need it and why it is here for the benefit of us all, except the people who want to break the law.

Trust me Hap, I know exactly what you're talking about. From only my few months in Atlasia I have a very good idea of what headaches and annoyances allowing posting of PM's will cause, and I don't like the idea.

That said, my belief is the statute so broadly chills free speech and the free press that, in this case, the cure is simply worse than the disease. Not to say the underlying disease doesn't still suck though.... :-P

I don't see how the PPA chills free speech and press. It is the equivalent, in my view, of banning wire-taps without a warrant.

The only problem with that is that it is completely different.

Banning wiretaps does not limit free speech.

[Хahar 🤔]

Lol.


Mind you, we had a zombie Senator once.

Yes, the bad old days.

[Хahar 🤔]

Xahar - Invalid (VP choice not clearly interpretable)

This is, uh, self-evidently moronic.