Chief Justice Roberts Rules Against Free Speech Rights of Christian Students In 8-1 Ruling

65
0
chief-justice-roberts-rules-against-free-speech-rights-of-christian-students-in-8-1-ruling
Spread the love

In a remarkable and unconstitutional display, Chief Justice John Roberts–a globalist Bush appointee, was the only Supreme Court justice to rule against free speech.

Ever since his jaw-droppingly left-wing decision on Barrack Obama’s healthcare plan, Constitutional Americans have understood without any doubt that John Roberts is dishonest.  In the past, however, he hid it better using constitutional language and more convoluted arguments to subvert the constitution.  Now, the mask is completely off.  Roberts, today positioned himself as the sole dissenter against free speech in a clear-cut case of discrimination based upon religious beliefs.

Today’s 8-1 decision in Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski marks the first time Chief Justice John Roberts has ever been the sole dissenting justice during his entire tenure. https://t.co/6Ux9HvXiDL

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) March 8, 2021

The Federalist Reports:

Chief Justice John Roberts was the only dissenter in the U.S Supreme Court’s most recent ruling favoring a couple of Christian students who challenged their university for restricting when, where, and how they could speak about their faith and disseminate materials on campus.

Uzuegbunam et al. v. Preczewski et al. first materialized after Chike Uzuegbunam, a student at Georgia Gwinnett College, was stopped by campus police for handing out religious materials on campus, a reported violation of the school’s “Freedom of Expression Policy,” which limited distributions and other expressions to free speech zones only with permission from the administration. Even after Uzuegbunam moved to the designated areas with permission, however, campus police attempted to stop him from speaking and handing out religious literature, prompting him and another student, Joseph Bradford, to take legal action against the university for violating their First and 14th Amendment rights and seek nominal damages.

 » Read More

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here