First Amendment, anyone?
 

So no unconstitutional laws are ever passed? I guess we don't really need the Supreme Court any more.

First Amendment, anyone?
 

Hank, I gave that one to you fair and square. I myself am glad to see you arguing for governmental authority and power. It warms my heart to see that the era of conservatives arguing for limited government is over.

And, it's good to see how much you trust Congress, too. I'm sure you'll give everything coming out of Congress over the next couple of years the benefit of the doubt.

First Amendment, anyone?
 

I quit.

First Amendment, anyone?
 

the first maybe 3 or 4 posts by your southern general sock were witty. I think it was because this lame attempt at sarcasm was wrapped in a layer of the accent, or something, but really your naked attempts are lame.

First Amendment, anyone?
 

Woo hoo!



Hank lied!

First Amendment, anyone?
 

I assumed that it's a small step from agreeing that a restriction on speech is overbroad to agreeing that it is constitutionally problematic. I seem to have lost you on that step. It's another small step, rhetorically, to calling the overbreadth "nuts," if there is no plausible justification for it. I don't see you offering one.

I don't think misrepresenting one's status as a decorated veteran should, per se, be a federal crime. If those misrepresentations are part of fraud, then prosecute the fraud.

Consider two eccentrics. One has a lot of a money and represents himself as homeless. The other never served and represents himself as a decorated veteran. Absent other facts, why is one a criminal but not the other?

Chilling effect? Really? Good.

It is simple, but it's also crazy. The government gives stop signs certain criteria, but that doesn't permit the goverment to forbid anyone from displaying a stop sign. Sure, you can be convicted if you misuse one, but the crime is the misuse, not the speech itself.

I wouldn't call you a totalitarian, but you do seem to have a cramped appreciation of free speech today.

First Amendment, anyone?
 

Colonel Sanders is going to be in a lot of trouble.

First Amendment, anyone?
 

S_A_M agrees that the law is overbroad, and neither of you has offered a justification for the overbreadth.

Right. My posts here are usually devoid of links to things like the statute we're discussing, and your posts are chock-a-block full of them. If you have something useful to say about the Hatch Act, in respond to Burger's post, e.g., just go ahead.

First Amendment, anyone?
 

Only if he claims to be decorated. But Hank seems to have considerable familiarity with the legislative history, so perhaps he knows something else that KFC's lawyers should worry about.

First Amendment, anyone?
 

Of course the analysis is done. It's then ignored by Congress and punted to the courts.

First Amendment, anyone?
 

He's decorated by Robert E. Lee. Oddly, KFC does not accept Confederate money.

First Amendment, anyone?
 

The government has a greater interest in protecting the meaning of its military decorations than in protecting the meaning of homelessness.

First Amendment, anyone?
 

I wonder if they're going to prosecute Thomas Rost.

First Amendment, anyone?
 

I thought that the criminal laws were supposed to be about protecting individuals, rather than the government's interest in different messages.

First Amendment, anyone?
 

So a law against defacing a government building with grafitti wouldn't be proper?