Yee Backs Kagan

May 11, 2010 -

California State Senator Leland Yee (D - San Francisco), the man behind the original legislation that’s now made its way to the Supreme Court, has offered his thoughts on SCOTUS nominee Elena Kagan.

Noting that Kagan has “argued for very limited exemptions to the First Amendment including areas of hate speech, pornography, military recruitment, and animal cruelty,” Lee said of the nominee:

I commend President Obama on the selection of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court.  Ms. Kagan is well-qualified for this important post and should be immediately confirmed by the US Senate.  While championing First Amendment rights, she has correctly opined that there is a need for very narrow exceptions to protect society and children.

 

I look forward to her consideration of our law to ensure parents have a voice in determining which video games are appropriate for their children.


Comments

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

Awww...  does poor widdle Society need mommy to hold its hand so it can tinkle?  Please...  "Society" doesn't need to be protected by a bunch of censor-happy nitwits.  If anything, it needs to be protected from them.

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

You guys are way over analyzing this.  Yee isn't backing Kagan because of her interpretation of the Constitution.  He's backing Kagan because she is an appointee by a Democratic president and Yee is a Democrat.  I promise you it doesn't go any deeper than that.

www.thelobbyist.net

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

I Think We should Oppose Kagen, by telling our senators To don't support her

Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights

America has just became its own version of the Jerry Springer Show after a bizarre moment in Florida involving a carnival worker.

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

"I look forward to her consideration of our law to ensure parents have a voice in determining which video games are appropriate for their children."

Um, they already do it's called BEING A PARENT!

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

 Heh.

What he really means is he wants to ensure that 'leader' parents have a voice in determining which video games are appropriate for other people's children.

I have noticed a rising trend in this behavior as we have gotten away from the highly centralized parenting communities (usually built around churches) where parents generally took their cues from a small number of influential 'leader' parents.  I think much of this is coming from people who would traditionally be in that role and are frustrated that not as many people are hanging on their every word.

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

As noted in an earlier post, I actually read Kagan's manuscript on pornography and hate speech.  Overall, I was not reassured.  She does seem to argue that these kinds of speech (which she makes clear at the beginning of her article, she herself finds offensive), could be regulated in ways that don't violate the First Ammendment. 

So although I don't think we can say 100% on her one way or another, her appointment is more worrisome than comforting.  So Yee may have a reason to be happy here.

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

"I look forward to her consideration of our law to ensure parents have a voice in determining which video games are appropriate for their children."

If you feel you need a law to ensure you have that voice then you completely suck as a parent.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

You mean Yee backs someone thats not against censorship? What a shocker.

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

Glad shes pro free speech. :D This makes me worry less and I hope she will say games are protected under free speech.

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

But she's not, though. Even worse, she supports holding someone without a trial just for being a "suspect."

http://www.dakotavoice.com/2010/05/scotus-nominee-kagan-argued-against-f...

http://www.prisonplanet.com/kagan-disappear-free-speech-if-the-governmen...

"...someone suspected of helping finance Al Qaeda should be subject to battlefield law — indefinite detention without a trial — even if he were captured in a place like the Philippines rather than a physical battle zone.”

Of particular worry is this quote: "Whether a given category of speech enjoys First Amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs."

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=152305

Do you really think that she would think that video games, especially violent ones, have "value"?

-Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

-Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

There's an article on Kagan linked to in the Shout Box:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64A0AJ20100511

It's called "Why Hollywood should be Nervous About Court Pick", but it mostly focuses on her views on intellectual property, and her liberal support of the fair use doctrine. However, the closing of the article gives some reassurance:

"And finally, Hollywood's got at least one reason to cheer. Her history in academia suggests she'll be an extreme supporter of free speech under the First Amendment."

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

Hey I was the one that posted it in the shoutbox

Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights

America has just became its own version of the Jerry Springer Show after a bizarre moment in Florida involving a carnival worker.

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

Of course Yee backs her, she may well give him what he wants. If the person spoke out against censorship he'd be saying the choice would only lead to dissaster.

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

Does Leland Yee know something we don't?  

 "No law means no law" - Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black on the First Amendment

"No law means no law" - Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black on the First Amendment

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

 Possibly.

Though it is starting to sound a bit like she is less for the first ammendment, and more for finding ways to censor without technically crossing it.  She would have been a big fan of the 'Marihuana Tax Act of 1937' which got around the pesky contitution via creating an impossible to obtain tax stamp... so it did not technically outlaw something that they could not, it simply made it illegal to sell without a paying a tax that could not be paid.

This could potentially make her very dangerous when it comes to 1st ammendment cases.. she is wise in the letter of the law but seems to be against the spirit.

Re: Yee Backs Kagan

There isn't that much chap stick in the world for Yee.

Nightwng2000

NW2K Software

http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000

Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Craig R.Btw, the guy who swatted security expert Brian Krebs? He got picked up recently. It can be done.09/20/2014 - 8:55pm
Craig R.Such things are not done in a vacuum... hence why the 4chan and other logs show what fools you've all been, tricked into doing the trolls' work09/20/2014 - 8:49pm
Sleaker@Technogeek - How do you call someone out that anonymously calls in a SWAT team, or sends threats to people?09/20/2014 - 7:04pm
Technogeek"It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so." I'd say you're certainly obligated to call them out when you see it happening.09/20/2014 - 5:17pm
SleakerNow if you disagree with anything in my last 2 posts then we obviously have a difference in world view, and wont come to any sort of agreement. I'm fine with that, maybe some people aren't?09/20/2014 - 5:09pm
SleakerIt also doesn't mean that just because a news outlet says that Gamers are the problem and you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem. It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so.09/20/2014 - 4:59pm
SleakerJust to re-iterate: People getting harassed is wrong. Just because someone is harassed by so called 'gamers' doesn't mean that all gamers are bad. nor does it mean that you need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers.09/20/2014 - 4:56pm
SleakerAnd furthermore just because someone doesn't 'crusade against the evil' that doesn't make them the problem. You can have discussion with those around you. There's a thing called sphere of influence.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
Sleaker@Conster - one person getting harassed is a 'problem' only so far as the harassee's are doing it. Just because a select few people choose to act like this doesn't make it widespread. Nor does it immediately make everyone responsible to put an end to it.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
james_fudgeno worries09/20/2014 - 4:15pm
TechnogeekI misread james' comment as "we can't have a debate without threatening" there at first. Actually wound up posting a shout about death threats and "kill yourself" not technically being the same thing before I realized.09/20/2014 - 3:59pm
james_fudgeDon't hit me *cowers behind Andrew*09/20/2014 - 3:20pm
ConsterYou take that back right now, james, or else. *shakes fist menacingly*09/20/2014 - 3:00pm
james_fudgeOur community is awesome. We can have a debate without threatening to kill each other.09/20/2014 - 2:50pm
Andrew EisenNo one's crossed a line but I just want to remind you all to keep discussions civil.09/20/2014 - 1:54pm
Craig R.tldr: I'm a gamer, and imo those who support GamerGate should feel free to take a flying leap off a cliff.09/20/2014 - 1:27pm
Craig R.Not only that, I'm pretty sure that if actual studies were done, you'd still deny them, Sleaker. After all, it's not what you'd want to hear to support your rose-colored view of GamerGate.09/20/2014 - 1:18pm
Craig R.There IS an issue. Nor do we need a study to show that if you deny it then you're part of the problem.09/20/2014 - 1:17pm
Sleakersimply oust people that do harass others.09/20/2014 - 11:34am
Sleaker@Conster - I can say the same thing if you think there's been more than a handful. Until there's an actual study on rates no one can claim to know how widespread the incidence of harassment is. Thus the best we can do is 'there might be an issue' and...09/20/2014 - 11:33am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician