Supreme Court Hearts Censorship, is bi-curious about NeoCons…

If you thought that, having gorged themselves on the rights and freedoms of We the People and wiped their asses with the Bill of Rights, the Thought Police of the Supreme Court would return to Valhalla to slumber now that Bush and Co. are out of the White House, think again. In the past week, they’ve hit We the People with a double whammy of First Amendment bashing.

First, there was the decision to uphold the FCC’s right to fine people for swearing and other verbal slips:

The Supreme Court said yesterday that the Federal Communications Commission may penalize even the occasional use of certain expletives on the airwaves but left for another day the question of whether such a policy is constitutional.

The court’s narrow ruling said the FCC — prompted by Cher’s use of the F-word during a 2002 live broadcast and similar remarks by what Justice Antonin Scalia called “foul-mouthed glitteratae from Hollywood” — was justified in changing its policy in 2004 to fine broadcasters up to $325,000 every time certain words are allowed on the air.

This from a man who laughed as Stephen Colbert flipped him off (Italian-style) at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner a few years ago. Then again, the WHCD is just one massive circle jerk when the media and the politicians in bed with said media get together for an orgy of mutual masturbation.

Fox Television Stations and other networks had challenged FCC’s actions under the Administrative Procedure Act. They said the agency did not adequately explain why it changed its policy, which previously held that one-time utterances of expletives did not constitute a violation of FCC rules.

…Fox said it was disappointed but “optimistic that we will ultimately prevail when the First Amendment issues are fully aired before the courts.”

For Christ’s sake, Supreme Court, you’re making me side with FOX on this one? Something is seriously wrong here.

My favorite quote, however, once again comes from the Justice I love to hate the most. Mr. Scalia, take it away:

“Whether [the policy] is unconstitutional will be determined soon enough, perhaps in this very case,” Scalia wrote in sending the case back to the appeals court. In the meantime, any suppressed “references to excretory and sexual material surely lie at the periphery of First Amendment concern.”

Essentially, if it refers to sex or feces, it’s automatically naughty! Because we’re not going to go by the intention of our Founding Fathers — especially not the so-called Constitutionalist Scalia. Oh no. We’re going back further, to the true founders of this country, the Puritans! They knew the score, and that is to say that scoring is bad, mmm kay. Sex is bad, it’s something we do, but we should still be kind of ashamed of, because we enjoy it! And we shouldn’t! It’s dirty! It’s wrong! It is animalistic and uncivilized! It’s horrid! WHEN WILL YOU PEOPLE STOP THINKING ABOUT SEX! DIRTY!

Then, to drive the point home, the Supreme Court decided to send the FCC fine of CBS over Nipple Gate back to the lower courts for reconsideration.

The high court on Monday directed the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia to consider reinstating the $550,000 fine that the Federal Communications Commission imposed on CBS over Jackson’s breast-baring performance at the 2004 Super Bowl.
…
Last year, the appeals court threw out the fine against CBS, saying the FCC strayed from its long-held approach of applying identical standards to words and images when reviewing complaints of indecency.

The appellate court said the incident lasted nine-sixteenths of one second and should have been regarded as ”fleeting.” The FCC previously deviated from its nearly 30-year practice of fining indecent broadcast programming only when it was so ”pervasive as to amount to ’shock treatment’ for the audience,” the court said.

But, ah, see the Supreme Court just decided two things in Tuesday’s ruling: sex is always naughty and not protected by the First Amendment on it’s face (THANKS SCALIA!) and that “fleeting” does not equal “excusable”. So, if you’ve been dying to see Janet Jackson’s nipple again, you’re in luck, because this case just won’t go away! The nip slip seen and heard round the world returns, and this time, it’s personal.

Or something like that.

References:
Supreme Court Revives Fine Over Super Bowl Incident
Supreme Court Rules that Government Can Fine for ‘Fleeting Expletives’