Supreme Court overstepping their boundaries

[Prudence]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

However, my feeling is, because not all cases (probably very few cases) are as clear-cut as my hypotheticals, and the only method for distinguishing them is a subjective analysis of motivation (aka, mindreading), an outright ban from public areas of government institutions should be the only solution. It may not be ideal, but if apparant motivation is the only test, then it's too easy to get around that just by putting on the right show.

I think that's a cop-out and the sort of thinking that has school zero-tolerance policies sending kids home for making "guns" out of their fingers on the playground.

Most cases ARE clear-cut and you'll never ever hear about them. You only hear about the ones that push the boundaries, which makes them seem more prolific than they are.

And to top it off, subjective tests are used throughout the legal system. Even the "objective" tests are subjective. ("Reasonable person" standard, anyone?)