How far outside of the boundaries does an ultra-liberal Judge have to go to make the ACLU side with the former President?
Former President, and now Defendant, Donald Trump has said many things. Much that he has said has been patently false and has caused great harm to countless individuals, as well as to the Republic itself. Some of his words and actions have led him to this criminal indictment, which alleges grave wrongdoing in contempt of the peaceful transition of power.
But Trump retains a First Amendment right to speak, and the rest of us retain a right to hear what he has to say. The entire order hinges on the meaning of the word ‘target.' But that meaning is ambiguous and fails to provide the fair warning that the Constitution demands, especially when, as here, it concerns a prior restraint on speech.
Not sure that "much" of what he has stated has been patently false. I tend to agree in principle that the 2020 election was anything but on the up and up. I might not be in the majority, but I am part of a minority that is just a few percentage points away from a majority. Or to be blunt: I am part of probably 150-200 million Americans who question Biden's victory to some degree or another.
That being said, there are a great deal many things stated about several past elections (including the 2016 Presidential Election, the various times that Stacy Abrams has lost the Georgia Governor's race, as well as the 2020 Presidential election) that were certainly patently false. We could probably add those who demanded that George W Bush stole two elections to the list if we want to go back further. Certainly Trump has made claims that I believe are likely false. Many of his surrogates (Giuliani for one) made many ridiculous claims. But he is not alone.
So given the pure volume of patently false claims about many election results, I am sure that you can quantify that what Trump has personally said has caused any more or less harm than other false claims. Certainly there was more violence and destruction in the 2017 protests of Trump's victory than the 2020 protests of Trump's defeat. In fact, by all objective accounts, there was way more violence and destruction, it was just not reported as such.
So the ACLU certainly makes some dubious claims here, but the bottom line is that they believe that the Judge has gone too far in gagging the former President.
Comments