THE NEXT ASSAULT ON FREE SPEECH: The WSJ editors perspicaciously predict the “Return of the Speech Police” in the 2016 presidential election:
[A] behind-the-scenes effort is under way to lobby the Federal Election Commission and Justice Department to stifle free political speech the way the Internal Revenue Service did in 2012. Don’t be surprised if the subpoenas hit Republican candidates at crucial political moments.
...The theory behind this accusation is campaign “coordination,” the new favorite tool of the anti-speech political left.
There is no limiting principle–just ask conservatives in Wisconsin who supported Scott Walker’s efforts to reform public sector unions. The point isn’t so much that liberals/progressives think they will ultimately win when these efforts are inevitably challenged in court. The point is that merely investigating conservatives on shadowy “coordination” allegations is sufficient to chill conservatives’ speech, sending supporters (and their funds) elsewhere.Earlier this year the Justice Department invited such complaints with a public statement that it would “aggressively pursue coordination offenses at every appropriate opportunity.” . . .Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer says Mr. Bush should be considered a candidate who is illegally coordinating because if you asked “100 ordinary Americans” if he is a candidate, they will say yes. What a bracing legal standard. What would the same 100 Americans have said about Hillary Clinton in 2013, or Ted Cruz in high school? Where is the limiting principle?
No comments:
Post a Comment