Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
Ah!
So in example A the speaker didn't have the right to speak. But in example B he did.
Thanks for the education. Now if someone can just explain why some presidents can issue executive orders while others cant I think I'll be all set
pjstroh is catching on, . . . almost, . . .
DonDiego will try to simplify:
n.b. DonDiego presented 3 scenarios; he is not certain which is Example A and Example B.
__In the example, where the speaker is invited to speak at a sponsored event, the event sponsor may dis-invite him. If one is not a scheduled speaker, indeed, one does not have a right to speak at the event. Otherwise scheduled speaking events would be chaotic. This is not a violation of someone's right to free speech.
__If someone opposes a speaker at a scheduled speaking event, he is free to express that opposition and even demonstrate against the speaker, so long as the opposition is not disruptive, violent, or criminal. This is not a violation of someone's right to free speech.
__Thugs who intimidate the speech of others through criminal acts, . . . such as violence against persons, destruction of property, and arson, . . . are criminals. This is a violation of the right to free speech of the invited speaker.
