Are gag orders constitutional?

[jc456]

Here is the definition of "precedent" from Merriam Websters dictionary:
"

precedent​

1 of 2

adjective​

pre·ce·dent pri-ˈsē-dᵊnt ˈpre-sə-dənt

Synonyms of precedent
: prior in time, order, arrangement, or significance
precedent
2 of 2

noun​

prec·e·dent ˈpre-sə-dənt
1
: an earlier occurrence of something similar

2
a
: something done or said that may serve as an example or rule to authorize or justify a subsequent act of the same or an analogous kind
a verdict that had no precedent

b
: the convention established by such a precedent or by long practice

3
: a person or thing that serves as a model

Then explain how gag order fits

 

[WinterBorn]

No you didn’t

Yes, I did.

Can you yell 'Fire' in a crowded theater? No?
So your right to free speech is not inviolate.

Or is making it illegal to yell 'Fire' in a crowded theater unconstitutional as well?

 

[WinterBorn]

Then explain how gag order fits

The gag order fits because the right to free speech can be abridged. It is not inviolate.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Yes, I did.

Can you yell 'Fire' in a crowded theater? No?
So your right to free speech is not inviolate.

Or is making it illegal to yell 'Fire' in a crowded theater unconstitutional as well?

Endangered vs calling someone an a hole are two separate things

 

[WinterBorn]

Progressivehunter, Fake News??

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Endangered vs calling someone an a hole are two separate things

Not when you have a violent cult at your feet that acts on your orders, and that person is court staff or a witness.

 

[WinterBorn]

Endangered vs calling someone an a hole are two separate things

Abridging someone's right to free speech, whether it endangers people in a theater or witnesses in a trial, is constitutional in both cases.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Not when you have a violent cult at your feet that acts on your orders, and that person is court staff or a witness.

Let’s not drag BLM and ANTIFA into the topic.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Let’s not drag BLM and ANTIFA into the topic.

Cultists gonna cult...

 

[jc456]

Yes, I did.

Can you yell 'Fire' in a crowded theater? No?
So your right to free speech is not inviolate.

Or is making it illegal to yell 'Fire' in a crowded theater unconstitutional as well?

That isn’t in the same category. You can’t learn either

 

[Weatherman2020]

Abridging someone's right to free speech, whether it endangers people in a theater or witnesses in a trial, is constitutional in both cases.

If only it was witness intimidation

 

[jc456]

Cultists gonna cult...

And they are

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If only it was witness intimidation

Who decides whether or not it was?

Take your time.

 

[jc456]

If only it was witness intimidation

But the prosecution is victim intimidation of the defendant

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But the prosecution is victim intimidation of the defendant

*in fantasyland

 

[jc456]

Who decides whether or not it was?

Take your time.

Tell us!

 

[jc456]

*in fantasyland

I posted how in my Idaho 4 video. Feel free to watch

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Tell us!

Nope! You and your orange god need to learn this lesson.

Take all the time you need.

 

[WinterBorn]

That isn’t in the same category. You can’t learn either

If you can deny free speech in one instance, then you can in the other.

And gag orders are specifically in the hands of judges.

 

[jc456]

If you can deny free speech in one instance, then you can in the other.

And gag orders are specifically in the hands of judges.

No you can’t, there’s no precedence