Supreme Court slaps Ninth Circuit Nitwits - Again!

The anti-Christian, family-hating nitwits on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals again get backhanded by the Supreme Court for trying to redefine the Consitution...

From Americans for Limited Government --

On February 24th, the Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circus—err, Circuit—Court of Appeals once again. Unsurprisingly so, since they are most oft-overturned appeals court in the nation. And decidedly so, as well, in the 7-2 decision of Ysursa v. Pocatello Education Association.

In this case, the Ninth Circuit had read into the First Amendment a “right” of public employee unions to utilize public payroll deductions for political purposes. In Idaho, it is a matter of law that public employee unions—or any other government agency or organ—may use payroll deductions for political purposes.

This has instant impact of allowing union workers to decide whether or not they’d like to donate to a union’s political arm. The effect, of course, may be to effectively hamper a union’s political activities. But taxpayers have a reasonable expectation that their hard-earned money is not utilized on a de facto basis for political activities.

Americans for Limited Government on June 6th had filed an amicus curiae brief in the case, and certainly we here are gratified that the Supreme Court overwhelmingly agreed with us.

The real story, though, is the absurdity of the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in the first place. The First Amendment does not require government to devote taxpayer resources to facilitating the speech of anybody. In other words, a state’s budget is not in itself a public forum.

If it were, governments across the nation would be required as a matter of law to facilitate the speech of all points of view. Clearly, an untenable standard, when the purpose of the First Amendment is to protect political speech from government interference. And in an era when government funding comes with government strict terms and conditions, clearly the power of the purse would have a chilling rather than enabling effect on speech.

Therefore, the Ninth Circuit’s initial ruling—which truly was a circus act—in Ysursa was actually quite dangerous, and the Supreme Court deserves praise for stamping out the potential flames of government coercion upon the freedom of expression.

Robert Romano is the Editor of ALG News Bureau.

9th Circuit Finally Gets One Right!

Who would have thought the clowns from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals would ever make a good decision?!?

From ALIPAC --

A federal appeals court has upheld Arizona's employer sanctions law, which penalizes businesses that knowingly hire illegal immigrants and requires them to verify the employment status of their workers.

The law imposes a civil penalty on businesses that knowingly hire illegal workers. Violating the law could cause a business's licenses to be suspended or revoked.

Rep. Russell Pearce, who spearheaded the effort to enact a state law to punish businesses for hiring illegal immigrants, called the ruling a victory.

"You know what? Even the 9th Circuit gets things right every once in a while. What a great ruling," he said. More....

9th Circuit rules use of N-word fine, but 'family values' banned

This post is an update on a Free Speech case out of CA that I have been following and posting on. Which you can read here and here.

In another attack on christianity and Free Speech the City of Oakland has forbid employees to use words such as, Family Values, marriage, Mom, Dad, etc....

In a court ruling supporting this censorship, the looney 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, noted that Christians' speech rights are "Vanishingly Small".

From World Net Daily --

A Christian organization fighting on behalf of religious and speech rights is going to the U.S. Supreme Court to challenge an appellate court decision that found municipal employers could censor words such as "marriage" and "family values" because they are hate speech and could scare workers.

At the same time, those municipal officials for the city of Oakland, Calif., were allowing employees to exchange epithets such as the N-word, the appeal said.

The case involves the Good News Employee Association and two women, Regina Rederford and Robin Christy, who wanted to launch the organization among co-workers. They put up an announcement on an Oakland city bulletin board asking those interested in those "family" issues to contact them.

This came after the same bulletin board – as well as the city's e-mail system – had been used to promote speech "concerning war, health-care, peace, employee outsourcing, sports, racism, slavery, spirituality, hate, God, the Gay-Straight Employee Alliance, tolerance, homosexuality, 'coming out,' diversity, Christ, the Bible, sexuality, and a host of other topics," the appeal said.

None of those topics was a problem. However, their supervisors ordered the two Christians' announcement about Good News pulled down, and issued a warning that such "homophobic" literature could lead to penalties up to and including dismissal, the law firm said.

The decision was affirmed by the 9th Circuit, More......

Abolish 9th Circuit

From The Gazette

Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, called for replacing the judges of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in an appearance on Focus on the Family’s daily radio program Thursday.

“The Ninth Circuit is so consistently wrong, it is so consistently radical, it is such a violation of the spirit of American history, that we’d be better off if we simply abolished it,” he told the program’s host, James Dobson.

Gingrich advocated reconstituting the court with different judges. Because federal judges are appointed for life, such a move would require impeachment of the Ninth Circuit judges.

The Ninth Circuit has long rankled conservatives with its controversial rulings, which include declaring unconstitutional the addition of the words “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance.

During the program, Dobson cited another decision that he said allows public schools to “operate independently” of parents.

“That’s the kind of stuff this crazy court does, isn’t it?” Dobson said.

“This would be a completely reasonable court in France,” Gingrich said. “It makes no sense as a court in the United States.” More....

9th Circuit endorses censoring Christians

In another attack on our First Amendment right to Free Speech, the the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled municipalities have the right to censor employees speech.

This ruling is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to promote the homosexual agenda being forced down the throat of our country and redefine the First Amendment.

In a lesson on constitutional law, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has shown to change the constitution all you need is a pencil, an eraser and a handful of liberal judges willing to legislate from the bench.

The court ruled that cities can restrict use the words, "natural family," "marriage" and "family values" because that is hate speech and could scare workers.

The lawsuit was filed over the City of Oakland restricting the use of an employee bulletin board. Several workers began placing family value oriented material on the city bulletin board after receiving information promoting the gay lifestyle being sent from the city email account.

After "someone' complained they felt the material on the bulletin board was offensive, the city forced the workers to take the information down describing it as hate speech, if not they would be fired.

World Net Daily reported --

"Public employees are permitted to curtail employee speech as long as their 'legitimate administrative interests' outweigh the employee's interest in freedom of speech," said the court's opinion by judges B. Fletcher, Clifton and Ikuta, who noted that their writings are "not appropriate for publication."

"The district court appropriately described [the Christians' speech rights] as 'vanishingly small,'" the opinion continued.

However, as the Pro-Family Law Center noted, the court "completely failed to address the concerns of the appellants with respect to the fact that the City of Oakland's Gay-Straight Employees Alliance was openly allowed to attack the Bible in widespread city e-mails, to deride Christian values as antiquated, and to refer to Bible-believing Christians as hateful.

When the plaintiffs attempted to refute this blatant attack on people of faith, they were threatened with immediate termination by the City of Oakland. The Ninth Circuit did not feel that the threat of immediate termination had any effect on free speech." More....

No homosexual agenda? Yeah right!!

Again, our right to free speech is slowly being pared down to right to politically correct free speech.

KING

'Natural family' called derogatory to 'gays'

Arguments to be heard in Oakland's censorship of Christian workers

Posted: February 15, 2007
WorldNetDaily.com

A special session of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is being held today at the Stanford University Law School where lawyers are arguing whether the words "natural family, marriage and family values" constitute "hate speech" that could intimidate city of Oakland workers.

The words were used by two city employees who wanted to launch a group of people who shared their interests and posted a notice on a city bulletin board after a series of notices from homosexual activists were delivered to them via the city's e-mail system, bulletin boards and memo distribution system.

But Robert Bobb, then city manager, and Joyce Hicks, then deputy director of the Community and Economic Development Agency, ordered their notice removed, because it contained "statements of a homophobic nature" and promoted "sexual-orientation-based harassment."

The women, Regina Rederford and Robin Christy, also were threatened with firing from their city jobs because of their posting, according to their lawsuit against the city, which alleges Oakland's anti-discrimination policy "promotes homosexuality" and "openly denounces Christian values."

Attorneys Scott Lively and Richard D. Ackerman are arguing on behalf of the women in the First Amendment case that Christians have equal rights at work to use neutral language to talk about same-sex marriage and other issues.

U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker had ruled in 2005 that Oakland had a right to prevent the employees from posting a Good News Employee Association flier promoting traditional family values on the office bulletin board, even though homosexual city workers already had been using multiple communications systems in the city to promote their message to other workers, including the plaintiffs. Whole Story

--------------------------------------

I am still trying to figure out how "natural family, marriage and family values" constitute "hate speech" .

I must really be stupid because I do not understand how in the HELL these statements could be considered even close to homophobic in nature or are sexual based harassment.

If anybody can make this connection please let me know.

Personally, I would be offended and disgusted if I had to read crap promoting the gay "lifestyle" daily at work. To me this would be sexual harassment for the "straight" person.

No Gay Agenda? Yeah right!

KING