Unimportant speech not protected by the 1st Amendment
From GrassrootsFreedom.com:
Has the First Amendment lost out to judges who prefer to rely on convoluted judicial precedent rather than the actual language of the Constitution itself?
In the Pagan Parking Case, seven dissenting federal judges thought that protecting the right to place a “For Sale” sign in your own car parked on the street, “cheapen[ed] the grandeur of the First Amendment.”
Does that sound like the judges want to lock the First Amendment away and break it out only for special occasions? Are some judges protecting the “grandeur” of the judiciary more than the First Amendment?
Many of us in the grassroots believe that the First Amendment protects even what some judges may think is “unimportant” speech.
You can read the full text of an article about the Pagan v. Fruchey case at Human Events Online by clicking here: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=21716