And I hope they do, frankly, ... I think it's outrageous that they're subjected to these unconstitutional restrictions. |
Anything Dr. Dobson did to endorse candidates, he did as an individual, |
He's not a rookie. He's been doing this for 15 years. That usually doesn't change. He will do the same thing as a justice. |
I don't think these cases tell us anything about whether he would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade or not. Nor do they tell us whether he supports pro-life as a value. |
I think we should write a platform that allows the nominee to argue his position. |
I was very encouraged by the questions. |
If we believe in democracy and the role of the people, it's quite appropriate for the people to pick judges, |
In these cases he didn't go beyond the issues that needed to be resolved. He wasn't trying to create law. He was just carefully following the existing law. |
It's hard to overestimate how significant these two cases are together, |
some of the areas of concern which pose a substantial threat to free speech and free association rights of citizen groups. |
That is not our position. |
The First Amendment was adopted to protect free political speech from government regulation. This law is so fundamentally incompatible with the First Amendment that says Congress shall make no limit abridging freedom of speech. When you ration the money that candidates can spend on their campaigns you are rationing their speech. |
The forced reduction in overall candidate campaign spending is illegitimate under the First Amendment. In the free society ordained by our Constitution it is not the government but the people ... who must retain control over the quantity and range of debate on public issues in a political campaign. |
The lower court must now confront the real merits of this case ... that there is no constitutional justification for prohibiting grass-roots lobbying about upcoming votes in Congress, just because we are in an election season. |
The state would have to prove that Vermont is the most corrupt state in the country because they are trying to justify the lowest contribution limits and the only state with mandatory expenditure limits. That is just a ridiculous smear. |