fish boy it has never been considered unconstitutional and that is the fact of the mater
On Nov 11, 8:10 am, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The Court warned that if the doctrine ever restrained speech, then its > constitutionality should be reconsidered. > > However, in the case of Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo, 418 > U.S. 241 (1974), Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote (for a unanimous > court), "Government-enforced right of access inescapably dampens the > vigor and limits the variety of public debate." This decision differs > from Red Lion v. FCC in that it applies to a newspaper, where there is > no such technical limit on the number of possible newspapers. > > In 1984, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress could not forbid > editorials by non-profit stations that received grants from the > Corporation for Public Broadcasting (FCC v. League of Women Voters of > California, 468 U.S. 364 (1984)). The Court's 5-4 majority decision by > William J. Brennan, Jr. stated that while many now considered that > expanding sources of communication had made the Fairness Doctrine's > limits unnecessary, "We are not prepared, however, to reconsider our > longstanding approach without some signal from Congress or the FCC > that technological developments have advanced so far that some > revision of the system of broadcast regulation may be > required." (footnote 11). After noting that the FCC was considering > repealing the Fairness Doctrine rules on editorials and personal > attacks out of fear that those rules might be "chilling speech", the > Court added > > Of course, the Commission may, in the exercise of its discretion, > decide to modify or abandon these rules, and we express no view on the > legality of either course. As we recognized in Red Lion, however, were > it to be shown by the Commission that the fairness doctrine "[has] the > net effect or reducing rather than enhancing" speech, we would then be > forced to reconsider the constitutional basis of our decision in that > case. (footnote 12).[7] > > On Nov 11, 12:09 am, "mike [move on] 532" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > i hate to break it to you but the fairness doctrine has never been > > ruled unconstitutional . next time do a little research ! > > > On Nov 10, 8:04 pm, KeithInTampa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Nov 9, 3:11 am, "mike [Chief Moonbat] 532" wrote: > > > > please show how and where the fairness doctrine violated the > > > constitution ! > > > > ==== > > > > How about for starters, that little clause that states, "Congress > > > shall make no law....abridging the freedom of speech, or of the > > > press..." > > > > I doubt if you have ever read the document, but assuming for a second > > > that I am incorrect, and you have read the document, it is clear from > > > a number of your postings that you don't understand the verbiage. You > > > are not alone, Senator Charles Schumer has for years demonstrated that > > > he does not understand the Constitution of the United States, yet > > > Moonbats in New York continue to re-elect this Anti-American. > > > > With regard to a new, revised Fairness Doctrine, I think the > > > socialists are biting off more than they can proverbially chew. As I > > > understand it, this bill would apply to all forms of media, that are > > > open, public airwaves. This would include ABC, NBC and CBS, so in > > > essence, it will mean the demise of their biased news broadcasts. The > > > same goes for shows like The View, Boston Legal, well, damn near > > > everything that is produced in California would have to be afforded > > > equal time. > > > > Excuse my language, but I can think of no better > > > term....."Clusterfuck" comes to mind....- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
