Obama menace la liberté d'expression

Selon ses écrits, Elena Kagan pourrait dire « Je n'aime pas ce que vous dites et je ne veux pas que vous ayez le droit de le dire. Je suis pour une liberté d'expression à la française : restreinte »

Elena Kagan, la juriste proposée par le président Barack Hussein Obama (BHO) pour devenir le prochain juge de la Cour suprême a fait l'impossible pour ne laisser aucune trace de ses opinions et avis sur des sujets qui tiennent à cœur l'opinion américaine.

Son entregent et son sens des relations publiques lui ont permis d'occuper les plus hautes fonctions tant à l'université que dans l'administration publique sans pour autant avoir donné les preuves écrites de sa compétence.

Ses adversaires tout comme ses soutiens sont bien en peine de trouver dans ses écrits de quoi affûter leurs argumentaires.

Peu d'articles savants et pas de jugements… Un vide sidéral qui tranche avec les bibliographies et archives bien fournies des autres candidats potentiels. Un fait stupéfiant quand ont connaît la réalité de ce dicton universitaire américain : Publish or perish (« publie ou péris »). Sans articles ou sans ouvrages publiés un chercheur ne peut progresser dans la hiérarchie académique. Pourtant Elena Kagan l'a fait.

Un article d'Aaron Klein dans un site farouchement anti-BHO vient de jeter un pavé dans la mare. Dans un article publié en 1993, Helena Kagan plaide en faveur d'une restriction de la liberté d'expression si celle-ci met en péril l'idéal d'harmonie raciale et d'égalité.

Si on suit ses recommandation, les Etats-Unis peuvent tomber bien bas, peut-être même aussi bien que la France, pays où la liberté d'expression est restreinte par la loi et où les dissidents sont condamnés à la prison ferme ou à de lourdes amendes.

Je fais des vœux pour que la candidature de cette liberticide soit rejetée par le Congrès.

Kagan: Some speech can be 'disappeared' Wanted 'societal costs' counted against 1st Amendment rights NEW YORK – President Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court, Elena Kagan, argued certain forms of speech that promote "racial or gender inequality" could be "disappeared."

In her few academic papers, Kagan evidences strong beliefs for court intervention in speech, going so far as to posit First Amendment speech should be weighed against "societal costs.”

In her 1993 article "Regulation of Hate Speech and Pornography After R.A.V," for the University of Chicago Law Review, Kagan writes:

"I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation."

The hottest book in America is the one that exposes the real Obama! Get your autographed copy only from WND!

In a 1996 paper, "Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine," Kagan argued it may be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government.

That paper asserted First Amendment doctrine is comprised of "motives and … actions infested with them" and she goes so far as to claim that "First Amendment law is best understood and most readily explained as a kind of motive-hunting."

Kagan's name was also on a brief, United States V. Stevens, dug up by the Washington Examiner, stating: "Whether a given category of speech enjoys First Amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs."

Kagan's academic writings are sparse – just nine articles, two of which are book reviews.

Her stand on free speech could become a hot button issue as the Senate convenes to confirm her. If approved, Kagan would give the high court three women justices for the first time. She would be the youngest member on the current court and the first justice in nearly four decades without any prior judicial experience.

WND has reported that in her undergraduate thesis at Princeton, Kagan lamented the decline of socialism in the country as "sad" for those who still hope to "change America."

WND also reported Kagan has advocated for an increased presidential role in regulation, which, she conceded, would make such affairs more and more an extension of the president's own policy and political agenda.

Kagan was nominated as U.S. solicitor general by Obama in January and confirmed by the Senate in March. She was a dean of Harvard Law School and previously served alongside Obama as a professor of law at the University of Chicago.

A former clerk to Abner Mikva at the D.C. federal appeals court, Kagan was heavily involved in promoting the health-care policy of the Clinton administration.

Obama praised her because while he said a "judge's job is to interpret the law, not make the law," she has evidenced a "keen understanding of the impact of the law on people's lives."

The president said she has a "firm grasp on the nexus and boundaries between our three branches of government."

But more importantly, she understands, "behind the law there are stories, stories of people's lives," Obama said.

Kagan said the law is "endlessly interesting" and also "protects the most fundamental rights and freedoms."

With research by Brenda J. Elliott.

Un point de vue favorable à Elena Kagan, ici.

Un point de vue de gauche hostile à Elena Kagan, ici.

Elena Kagan pourrait mettre en péril un des grands privilèges de l'Amérique : la liberté d'expression des opinions les plus indéfendables, du racisme à la pédophilie, en passant par le pire et l'indicible. Voici un exemple extrême, impensable en France, qui démontre la solidité de la société américaine.