Tag Archives: free speech

The U.S. Supreme Court commenced its latest term October 2, and after the previous two years of drama and shocking decisions, the American populace is wondering what’s next.  Among the upcoming decisions:

Lindke v. Freed – A case in which the Court will decide whether a public official’s social media activity can constitute state action only if the official used the account to perform a governmental duty or under the authority of his or her office.

Murray v. UBS Securities LLC – A case in which the Court will decide whether, under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, a whistleblower must prove his employer acted with a “retaliatory intent” as part of his case in chief to succeed on a retaliation claim.

Rudisill v. McDonough – A case in which the Court will decide whether a veteran who has served two separate and distinct periods of qualifying service is entitled to receive all of the education benefits at once from programs associated with both periods of service.

United States v. Rahimi – A case in which the Court will decide whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), which prohibits the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic-violence restraining orders, violates the Second Amendment.  (Both domestic violence experts and gun rights supporters are closely watching this particular case.)

Vidal v. Elster – A case in which the Court will decide whether the refusal to register a trademark under 15 U.S.C. § 1052(c) violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment when the mark contains criticism of a government official or public figure.

The 2022 Dobbs decision upended the long-standing belief the High Court always moves the nation forward.  It wasn’t akin to the 1954 Brown decision, which reversed the 1896 Plessy ruling.  It was such a regressive move that even legal scholars remain stunned.  Afterwards, Justice Clarence Thomas – the longest-serving member of the Court and a conservative darling – declared the Dobbs decision opened the possibility for reversals of other cases, such as Obergefell v. Hodges that legalized same-sex marriage.  Curiously he said nothing of the 1967 Loving v. Virginia case that legalized interracial marriage.  (Thomas is currently married to a White chick.)

As upsetting as the Dobbs decision was, I know the case that will galvanize Americans; that is, the decision that – if reversed – will incite a revolution.  It is the one case that will drive Americans into the voting booth more than abortion, education, guns, queers or voting itself – Miller v. California, the 1972 decision that technically legalized pornography.  (Also see United States v. Reidel.) Yes, among all the sentient issues plaguing our modern society, denying people the right to view sexual activity will culminate in a revolution that could rival the collapse of the Roman Empire.  In the mid-1980s, President Ronald Reagan – perhaps still angry about the Miller decision – launched a war on pornography.  His then-Attorney General, Edwin Meese, commissioned associates to investigate the adult film industry under the guise of protecting children, which is indeed a noble effort.  But in reality, Reagan’s self-righteous demeanor drove his efforts to limit free speech; to stifle those who dared to disagree with him.  We saw much of the same two decades ago as critics of President George W. Bush were assailed.  Both extremist conservatives and liberals just don’t like when people have something negative to say about their lifestyles.  The same groups don’t have any problem, though, dictating what’s appropriate for others.  Conservatives, in particular, don’t like anything sexual.  It sends them into epileptic fits.

Regardless I can assure everyone that any U.S. Supreme Court assault on pornography will be taken seriously.  It has a lot to do with finances.  As of 2022, the adult film industry in the U.S. profited about $97 billion.  And that kind of money buys a certain amount of power.

The Reagan Administration failed to shut down pornography in the U.S.  Despite the AIDS epidemic, the adult film industry forged ahead in the 1980s and continued growing.  And I can assure even the most ardent of conservatives can’t stop it.  Then again, many of those same conservatives often view pornographic material – they just won’t admit it.  They really can’t because it would undermine their own limited credibility.

No matter what happens with the High Court, I doubt few other matters will resonate with voters as the X factor.  There are few things more obscene to me than war and unfettered censorship.