Finally, they all just got along.

Let’s begin by acknowledging that any kind of animal cruelty is vile. This being SCOTUS, however, means it’s not really about the particular subject but the underlying Constitutionality.

As Ed says, the fact that all but one were on board with this is stunning in the era where the court is as split as the country.

In the modern era, SCOTUS presupposes that we’ll know pornography when we see it but free speech has always seemed a bit more nebulous. The First Amendment tends to be thought of by the citizens as both restrictive (church/state issues) and generous (free speech issues). What caught my eye here is that Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the majority about free speech in terms of restricting the federal government.

“The First Amendment itself reflects a judgment by the American people that the benefits of its restrictions on the Government outweigh the costs. Our Constitution forecloses any attempt to revise that judgment simply on the basis that some speech is not worth it.”

I’m no Constitution wonk but I did find any reference regarding governmental restriction refreshing at a time when the reach of the government is growing as if it’s on steroids. I’m pretty sure an FBI guy sneaks in and sleeps under my bed at night, me being a right wing subversive and all. Hey-who told you I was paranoid?!?!?

Ed also correctly points out that sickos who abuse animals should be dealt with locally. And fiercely.

And let us film it.