[EL] is it now conventional wisdom that "liberal" means "anti-free-speech"?

[Joe La Rue]

It seems to me that, regardless of what one thinks about same sex marriage, there is a difference between serving someone something generic, like a hamburger, and using artistic talent to create expressive content, such as photographs. 

Sent from my iPhone using voice recognition software. Please excuse any mistakes. 

> On Jul 1, 2015, at 13:10, Joe Birkenstock <birkenstock at sandlerreiff.com> wrote:
> 
> I’ve got it, too. And so I guess we should be glad the black students who sat in at the Woolworth’s lunch counter weren’t trying to get their meal at a Subway. Since it seems that could have presented tough First Amendment concerns about sanctioning “sandwich artists” for refusing to use the unique medium of their sandwich art in support of a politically correct cause.
> 
> ___________________________________
> Joseph M. Birkenstock
> Sandler Reiff Lamb Rosenstein & Birkenstock, P.C.
> 1025 Vermont Avenue, NW, Suite 300
> Washington, DC 20005
> 202.479.1111
> *also admitted to practice in CA
> 
> 
> 
> From: John Tanner <john.k.tanner at gmail.com>
> Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2015 at 3:50 PM
> To: "Scarberry, Mark" <Mark.Scarberry at pepperdine.edu>
> Cc: "law-election at uci.edu" <law-election at uci.edu>
> Subject: Re: [EL] is it now conventional wisdom that "liberal" means "anti-free-speech"?
> 
> Got it
>> On Jul 1, 2015, at 3:48 PM, Scarberry, Mark <Mark.Scarberry at pepperdine.edu> wrote:
>> 
>> Elane Photography, New Mexico S. Ct., cert denied. See http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/elane-photography-llc-v-willock/,  and amicus brief in support of petitioner by Cato Institute, Eugene Volokh, Dale Carpenter, and Ilya (as counsel of record), http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/ElaneAmicusCato.pdf. 
>>  
>> Mark
>>  
>> Mark S. Scarberry
>> Professor of Law
>> Pepperdine Univ. School of Law
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of John Tanner
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2015 12:37 PM
>> To: Ilya Shapiro
>> Cc: law-election at uci.edu
>> Subject: Re: [EL] is it now conventional wisdom that "liberal" means "anti-free-speech"?
>>  
>> I missed the one about fining photographers
>>  
>> On Jul 1, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Ilya Shapiro <IShapiro at cato.org> wrote:
>>  
>> Is that a serious question when the Left pushes restrictions on political speech, wants to criminalize hate speech, pushes educational theories regarding trigger warnings and micro-aggression, forces workers to subsidize political activity against their interests, and fines photographers for not using their art to support politically correct causes?
>>  
>> Government has obviously advanced under Obama, so I’m not sure why you’re complaining. Just don’t mistake progressivism for (liberty-based) liberalism.
>>  
>> Ilya Shapiro
>> Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies,
>> Editor-in-Chief of the Cato Supreme Court Review
>> Cato Institute
>> 1000 Massachusetts Ave. NW
>> Washington, DC  20001
>> tel. (202) 218-4600
>> cel. (202) 577-1134
>> fax. (202) 842-3490
>> ishapiro at cato.org
>> Bio/clips: http://www.cato.org/people/shapiro.html
>> Twitter: www.twitter.com/ishapiro
>> SSRN: http://ssrn.com/author=1382023
>>  
>> Cato Supreme Court Review:  http://www.cato.org/supreme-court-review
>>  
>> Watch our 2014 Constitution Day Conference - Supreme Court Review/Preview:  http://www.cato.org/events/13th-annual-constitution-day
>>  
>> See me defend the right to keep and bear arms on the Colbert Report:  http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/340923/july-08-2010/automatics-for-the-people---ilya-shapiro---jackie-hilly
>>  
>> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Winger
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2015 12:09 PM
>> To: law-election at uci.edu
>> Subject: [EL] is it now conventional wisdom that "liberal" means "anti-free-speech"?
>>  
>> I am dismayed that the NY Times today, and analyses by others of a few days ago, seem to take it as conventional wisdom now that "conservatives" are pro-free-speech and "liberals" are anti-free-speech.  The NY Times today has a front page story about the "liberals" winning more cases in the last term of the court than they have in a long time.  The sidebar includes the Texas license plates case as a "liberal" victory.  The sidebar doesn't mention Reed v Town of Gilbert, Arizona, but presumably the authors classified that decision as a "conservative" victory.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> "Liberal" and "liberty" have the same root.  Would one now say that Sullivan v New York Times was a "conservative" victory?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I would say that Justice Thomas wrote a liberal decision in Reed v Town of Gilbert.  He struck down a government restriction on speech.  Is that no longer "liberal"?
>>  
>> Richard Winger
>> 415-922-9779
>> PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20150701/21f6e61d/attachment.html>