Political Activism

[*bfine32*]

(03-11-2017, 12:24 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The debate surrounding the 1st Amendment isn't WHO it protects freedom of expression from, it's HOW much of your freedom of expression is protected from the government. Besides the fact that the text specifically states the Congress is the body being restricted, we have historical evidence from Madison and all of those involved in the creation of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights that these protections were added because there needed to be a guarantee that the government could not infringe upon these rights. 

I guess someone can interpret "Congress" to be "Private citizen", but I am not sure how many federal judges, conservative or liberal, would entertain that argument. 

Fair response and who is right or wrong aside; I would say it is n interesting issue; as many agree that Freedom to Assemble (FTA) has been consumed with Freedom of Speech. I did read that SCOTUS has not ruling on a FTA in over 30 years.
. 
One case I did review was a case from over 100 years ago where SCOTUS declared that a civilian group could not deny another civilian group the FTA. I must admit I cannot find it now but the case was concerning a person whose last name started with C (Italian sounding if I recall) and I would like to read it again. As I do believe we are not talking the same language. I think you are saying Civilians cannot restrict FTA and I an interpreting that by case study as civilians cannot legally restrict FTA but the can physically do so which is a violation.