3 ms·
ADL has engaged in lobbying for policies that unconstitutionally conflict with the first ammendment. Whatever their legitimate grievances, that's not an accept
by lliamander 5y ago
ADL has engaged in lobbying for policies that unconstitutionally conflict with the first ammendment.
Whatever their legitimate grievances, that's not an acceptable response.
- this2shallPass 5y agoI think you’re referring to BDS and anti-BDS laws. Is that right? Are you referring to something else in addition to those? Do anti-BDS laws mean the ADL has an identity crisis? Or they should be having one? They seem related to their mission. I’m not a lawyer, and I’m not an expert in the first amendment, its case law, or anti-BDS laws. You might be right that some or all anti-BDS laws violate some first amendment right in some way. I don’t know which analogy is the right one to apply to anti-BDS laws, something different legal scholars and lawyers argue about. It seems like reasonable people can disagree about what is constitutional and what is not here. Maybe the supreme court will rule on it specifically, and even then it might still be the case that reasonable people can disagree.
- a1369209993 5y ago> Whatever their legitimate grievances, [conflict with the first ammendment]'s not an acceptable response. That's perfectly good reasoning, but: > ADL has engaged in lobbying for policies that unconstitutionally conflict with the first ammendment. as to your premises, again: > > Citation / explanation needed.