|
It would "scare" me if it were actually ruled that way. But based on such a short quote out of a conversation I don't know that I am super bothered by it.
First, all of the Supreme Court justices hold opinions that I disagree with.
Second, it is essentially this man's job to think deeply about topics and see all the shades of gray. It is valid to muse on where the edges of "shouting fire in crowded theaters" exceptions to the First Amendment lie and how they might shift over time. I'd be extremely surprised if when a real case were before him, he supported such a weakening of the First Amendment. But I have no problem with him discussing the nuances of it all.
But yes, I'd consider it a travesty if the Supreme Court were to someday rule in favor of so broad a hecklers veto and to me there is no way igniting a quran (or a flag or a bible or a picture of the pope or drawing a picture of Mohammed sodomizing Mary Baker Eddy or etc.) is equivalent to shouting fire.
|