Ermmmm not here. When you can afford to tango with them, they don't take surprising constitutional views actually. That part is in your favor. Its more about af

Ermmmm not here. When you can afford to tango with them, they don't take surprising constitutional views actually. That part is in your favor. Its more about affording to get that far, in other cases. This case isn't one of those? He wasn't charged for the speech, he was charged for violating a travel and business sanction after explicitly asking for an exemption and being denied. He went out of his way to hop over barriers placed by the government, and got charged for hopping over after telling the government he was interested in hopping over. They watched him hop over, they didn't charge him for the speech he gave after hopping over. Hopping over isn't a constitutional right.