The First Amendment is Alive and Well; Reason, however, may be lagging.
US Supreme Courts come and go – some take on names: the
Warren Court; the Burger Court; some are remembered for their role in the 2000
election, some for their more recent role in the Citizens United case, which cleared the way for infinite amounts of
corporate and union money to find its way into political coffers, both large
and small. Anybody who says they know
where and how all of the loose ends of that last one will tie up, is kidding
you . . .
But, we learned last week, in the process of the Supremes’
announced June decisions – I call them the Supremes with no disrespect
intended; Motown hits still play in my head decades after Diana Ross and the
Girls’ heyday; nor did I make up the name – that the First Amendment has a few
new twists and turns that nobody in particular really contemplated.
Or, perhaps it is me who was caught napping.
In reversing a healthy percentage of the Federal Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s decisions (something over 70% this year;
nothing special, really), the Supremes reminded us all who it is that has the
last word. Including in the reversals was California’s criminal law against
peddling violent and gory video games to children (the under-eighteen crowd).