Other right-wing accounts variously reacted by describing the move as Orwellian, lamenting the death of free speech and even contemplating leaving Canada for good.

Oh no. Not that. Please no.

<Tee hee!>

  • jasory@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Broad as defined by the standard around the world.

    “A violent activist SCOTUS”

    You heard it here folks… Washington DC is terrorised by the John Roberts gang.

    Are you literally so stupid as to think that leftists (especially the ones that argue for violence) don’t also benefit from broad free speech protections?

    • IHadTwoCows@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I am sure that they do not. They are not allowed in news channels. They have House resolutions passed against them. They have had their shows barred from the airwaves and corporations given the right to both slander and censor them.

      And the SCOTUS is, in fact, a violent entity, using it’s unchecked power against the American people under the fraudulent guise of morality. They are violent and should be met with equal violence, including removal and imprisonment and financial liability for all the women.they have caused direct physical harm and death to.

      • jasory@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        “They are violent and should be met with equal violence, including removal imprisonment and financial liability”.

        You complain that leftists are denied freedom of speech protections, and then immediately use that legal protection to call for violence.

        “Unchecked power against the American people”

        You know SCOTUS simply decides what rules are allowed, they don’t actually create them, that’s the legislatures.

        Do you really just want violent revolution so badly that you don’t care about reality?