Court rules MTA’s BAN ON FREE SPEECH Ads on Subway is Legal BUT Muslim Ads are OK to Run

First Amendment Lawsuits
Screen Shot 2016-03-03 at 3.57.28 PM
53

An appeals court judge has upheld a previous ruling that the MTA’s policy of refusing all political and religious ads in the transit system is legal, meaning the agency can continue to reject controversial posters by firebrand Pamela Geller and the anti-Muslim American Freedom law Center– for now.

But Islamic supremacists who sued to run an ad, “The Muslims are Coming! The Muslims are Coming!” (no, its not referring to the Muslim invasion of Europe) will be allowed to run.

That is sharia. We were running ads with DIRECT quotes from Muslim groups. That was considered “hate speech.” When they say it, we are told to respect it. When we repeat it, it’s hate speech.

This is exactly what the Founding Fathers wanted to avoid when they wrote the First Amendment. The freedom of speech amendment was meant to protect all speech, not just the speech the elites and their running dogs in the media liked. The MTA issued a ban that appears increasingly to only apply to AFDI. The Muslim supremacist ad and a Nazi ad can run. But not our pro-freedom ads.

This is exactly why the First Amendment was enshrined in our Constitution — because who would decide what’s good and what’s forbidden? Sharia-compliant, leftist judges?

Shame on this court. These quislings did not want to really handle this appeal in a serious way. They issued their opinion per curiam (anonymous agreement) — no one just wanted to put his/her name on this opinion. Cowards.

They just cite to the general rule that the appellate court only reverses trial court’s decision to dissolve injunction if that decision was “clearly erroneous.” But First Amendment cases are the exception, and there the review must start from the beginning. The appellate court did not even hint that the free amendment might affect the level of review. This is plainly wrong and goes against prior Second Circuit case law. For all those pleased with this ruling, don’t rub your hooves in glee. This kind of abuse of our rights enshrined in the Constitution will come back to bite you.

You’ll note this major NY newspaper calls my legal team “anti-Muslim.” Defending freedom of speech is now categorically labeled “anti-Muslim.”

Of course we will continue to fight on, but just look at how stacked the deck is. And considering Donald Trump’s anti-free speech declarations, I don’t see much changing.

“MTA’s ban anti-Muslim ads on subway is legal, court rules,” By Emily Saul and Danielle Furfaro, NY Post, March 3, 2016:

free speech2

An appeals court judge has upheld a previous ruling that the MTA’s policy of refusing all political and religious ads in the transit system is legal, meaning the agency can continue to reject controversial posters by firebrand Pamela Geller and the anti-Muslim American Freedom law Center– for now.

Geller’s attorney had appealed Manhattan Federal judge John Koeltl’s ruling last June, in which he said “No law requires public transit agencies to accept political advertisements as a matter of course.”

But the appeals court says that, given that the MTA had changed it policy disallowing all political ads in the midst the legal battle, Geller and the AFLC’s initial arguments are now “moot.”

“AFDI is, of course, free to challenge the MTA’s new advertising standards, but it must do so through an amended complaint,” the ruling reads.

Oh we will.

The case began in 2014, when Geller’s AFDI filed suit against the MTA for blocking it from purchasing Islam-bashing ads on city buses.

GellerHamasad.png

MTA officials said they are happy that the court took the agency’s side.

“The MTA is pleased by the Second Circuit’s decision, which reiterated that we have acted in good faith when balancing enforcement of our advertising regulations with respect for the First Amendment,” said MTA spokesman Adam Lisberg.

What respect for the first amendment? You shredded it, Lisberg. Wait until you need it.

  • atl slayer

    Freedom of spee_________________________________…………….. … .. . . .

    • Mahou Shoujo

      It’s the democrat, not the American way.

      • imwithstoopid

        Thanks for using the word “democrat” and not “democratic” to indicate the “Democrat” party in spite of the party being a Democratic entity (?).

        • Mahou Shoujo

          Yes, I have caught myself a few times trying to use the grammatically correct tense which skews the meaning completely, identical to democrat autocrats.

  • Dr. Doomsday

    Sharia. Rhymes with Gonorrhea and Diarrhea.

  • wilypagan

    Attention Cruz supporters: Unless you wish for Hillary to appoint the next Supreme Court justice and impose hate crime laws, gun confiscation, etc. you had better get behind Trump:

    https://twitter.com/StatesPoll

    • RalphB

      The Trump who will protect your 2nd Amendment rights is a figment of your wishful thinking.

      “I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons
      and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With
      today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72 hours if
      a potential gun owner has a record.” — Donald Trump in his book The America We Deserve (2000).

      If his current revised view were based on his now adopting genuine principles such as faithfully applying the explicit restriction placed on government by the Constitution, I might buy his transformed view. But it’s based on hot air reasoning such as this:

      “The government has no business dictating what types of firearms good, honest people are allowed to own.”

      Why not, Donald? Just because you say so? The man has policies not principles, policies that change as the direction the wind is blowing changes.

      We won’t be fooled again.

      • wilypagan

        If you prefer Hillary, so be it. Neither Rubio or Cruz are electable.
        See if she protects your gun rights. In a law and order Trump society, we can leave our guns at home.

      • Trevor Fortune

        Well your choice will be Hillary in an orange jump suit campaigning from behind bars, or mad dog Sanders wanting to add $17 trillion more to the national debt, or perhaps they will ship in Laughing Uncle Joe at the last minute because if the stories circulating today are true that Ben Carson is about to pull out and endorse Trump and hand him his delegates it is all over for Cruz and Rubio.

      • Reagan40

        You’re wasting your time here with your warped convoluted logic. Who are you talking to? Your CV?

      • SPECIAL FORCES VET

        You are out of your mind with regards to banning assault rifles. First of all the name Assault Rifle is a Liberal name given to rifles with a certain look during the Clinton administration and it can refer to any semi automatic weapon. My Glock pistol is a semi auto weapon and under your definition is an assault weapon. The reason Trump is right about the 2nd amendment is in the 2nd amendment Shall not infringe.The Liberals in your state and across the nation believe you can change the 2nd amendment by just changing rules as to what you can own and that is unconstitutional again Shall Not Infringe. The only way to change the 2nd amendment is to pass the 28th amendment repealing the 2nd amendment and then sending this new amendment to the states to be ratified by at least 38 states before it repeals the 2nd amendment. so try again to justify you unconstitutional argument because that dog don’t hunt boy. You can be against Trump all you want but you better do a better job of researching your topic before opening your mouth. It is better to remain silent and appear stupid and open your mouth and remove all doubts.

        • RalphB

          This kind of reply shows us why we are in big trouble. Special Forces Vet either cannot read or cannot think. I never defined “assault weapon” — I know what a semi-automatic is. It was Trump who wanted to ban so-called “assault weapons — you didn’t see the quote marks and the citation to where he said it???

          Trump is a “negotiator”, a “deal maker” — he has no interest in the absolute restrictions on the power of government required by the Constitution. He has no interest in you. He is going to strike a balance between left and right, so he can get elected with the help of Democrats and stay in power the same way. He has the “policies” he thinks will get him the nomination. He’s just as bad as most of the Republican establishment, but without their dignity..

          Here’s the best summary I could find of Trump’s so-called “principles and values”.

          http://ontheissues.org/Celeb/Donald_Trump_Principles_+_Values.htm

          Read it and weep. If you know of a better summary, post the link. Not a principle in sight, nothing but policies. No statement of devotion to the Constitution as written, nothing about individual rights, about the function of government being to protect rights. We know that a person’s life-long principles are generally formed before they are 25. Trump was 25 in 1971. The collection of “principles and values” I cited goes to 2008. If he couldn’t articulate a principle by the time he was 62, it’s obvious that the man will never have one. He will compromise away roughly half of whatever liberty you still have left. Don’t be fooled again.

          “In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can
          win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can
          profit.” – Ayn Rand

      • heidi granchelli

        Trump has stated very clearly that he was wrong about a ban on assault weapons, and like everyone else is entitled to learn from mistakes and continue to adjust views accordingly

  • VMS
  • Fred

    Keep up the fight Ms. Geller. There are millions of us out there who know you are a truth telling patriot. We will also NEVER SURRENDER to not just Sharia, but all invaders of our nation who think it’s perfectly OK to tell us how to live our lives.

    I remember being on the subway once and someone started talking to me in a language other than English. They looked at me like I was the SS because I didnt know what they were saying. Then a white libturd actually had the nerve to say I was rude. I reminded the savage that if it wasn’t for my country and the entire greatest generation, of which two of my ancestors were in WWII, they would be speaking German, Japanese or Italian. I also reminded the savage that my ancestors were expected to learn English; therefore, everyone else should do so.

  • Mahou Shoujo

    Loosing a battle does not mean losing the campaign. There are other hills to climb. The election is going to have lots of opportunities for the democrats and their running dogs to explain themselves.

  • FactsRule

    Can’t imagine the Supreme Court not reversing these cowardly perverse decisions.

    • William

      You have faith in the Supreme Court. I don’t. They are a bunch of corrupt elites like the rest.

      • Charlie

        It’s the same as the Supreme Court in Canada. Unelected and unaccountable.

  • spacearcadian

    freedom of speech doesn`t mean insulting other people`s beliefs. why the need of provoking muslims? no, it`s wrong and people who do it, should be fined and jailed; just like people who insult gays. people must find ways of understanding with muslims. restaurants get halal certification and muslims don`t atack them with machetes, just an example. the american flag has many stars, what about adding a crescent moon

    • Andy_Lewis

      Seek help.

    • Mahou Shoujo

      Then why are muslims allowed to openly threaten non muslims, assault people on the street, with impunity, get special considerations at work, in jail, in school, in public buildings, everywhere they go? Are not all Americans equal? Or muslims more equal than others?

    • Charlie

      So is that why Bill Clinton didn’t address the brutal oppression and prosecution of Christians in Nigeria when he visited there in August, 2000? He didn’t want to insult them regarding their major Human rights violations? Hundreds of thousands of Christians were murdered under Idi Admin’s barbaric regime. Even though only 6% of the population of Uganda was Muslims, Idi Admin declared Islam the official religion.

      Then one year later, on September 7, 2001, during Friday afternoon prayers, a Muslim mob beat a Christian woman to death. They claimed she walked past them while they were bowed in prayer, outside the Mosque. In rage they got up from their prayer mats and savagely beat her, killing both the woman and her pre-born child.

      So people should be jailed for telling what’s going on?

      • IzlamIsTyranny

        “Hundreds of thousands of Christians were murdered under Idi Amin’s regime”. I didn’t know that, but it explains why Soddy Barbaria provided Idi Amin safe haven (i.e. from being charged w/crimes against humanity), an annual stipend and his own mansion to live in at state expense.

    • Reagan40

      What about people who insult non muslims by calling them infidels? What about people who call jews descendents of apes and pigs? What about mosques that preach from the hate book called the koran? What about…? How about muslims finding ways to understand people not the other way round? How about halal certification, are you nuts? What about adding a peaceful cross to the deadly sword on the flag of Saudi Arabia? You’re not anly a dimwit, you’re mentally retarded like all followers of the immoral Bedouin prophet.

    • IzlamIsTyranny

      Yes freedom of speech does mean insulting other people’s beliefs muslum. If you don’t like the concept of freedom of speech you can always move back to whatever sh!ttystan spawned you.

    • thisguy

      muslims insult all none muslims, the koran says to strike terror into the none believers, to kill gays, to kill jews and christians, in the first hundred years of islam they are responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of people including children, and raping women, those responsible were muhammeds own family members who knew muhammed. islam is evil since it’s creation, islam must be banned and contained not spread or tolerated.

  • Dan Knight

    The US Constitution is tissue paper. … And largely has been since FDR.

  • Dan Knight

    Double-standards: If not for double-standards, Leftists would have no standards at all. Put another way: Rules are for the serfs and peasants.

  • Rocinante44

    another harvard indoctrinated “judge” appointed by clinton….what else did you expect from the fascists? elections have consequences (and stenches like this fool) that last for decades

  • Mahou Shoujo

    The more lies islam advertises, the more they contradict even the limp reporting of the lame stream media, the less credibility islam will have. A bit of strategic pressure, the right words in the right place will start an avalanche of muslim lies that will carry it back to the gutters it was spawned in.

    • Zaba

      the less credibility islam will have.

      islam has zero credibility now.
      Here’s the problem:

      Lack of education about islam is the biggest problem we have in the West.
      islam is in second place.

      politicalislam.com

      • Mahou Shoujo

        Civilization has its work cut out for it.

        • Zaba

          First step: identify the enemy.

          • Mahou Shoujo

            The enemy identifies itself, any and every muslim. The enablers and collaborators are not too hard to identify either.

          • Zaba

            No doubt you know I wasn’t referring to you and me.

  • The evil sharia law is UNCONSTITUTIONAL in our Judeo-Christian Nation United States of America!!

    “NO FOREIGN LAWS SHALL BE ADDED TO OUR BELOVED CONSTITUTION.”!!

    Please PRAY for our Judeo-Christian Nation United States of America and Israel-Yisrael Everyday Everyone!! “Pray Without Ceasing.” ( 1 Thessalonians 5:17 KJV )!!

    Love Always and Shalom Everyone,

    Kristi

    • Charlie

      George Washington also warned, “If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led like sheep to the slaughter”.

  • Reagan40

    The future does not belong to islamic fascism and those that censor free speech.

    • Zaba

      Just as soon as we identify the enemy…

  • IzlamIsTyranny

    Anti-muslim, anti-nazi what’s the difference?

  • charlie baker

    Of course, the whole idea behind Hate Speech and Hate Crime in general is to favor some “protected” class of people. The idea is devisive by its very nature. It is political correctness gone mad, and for that there is a heavy price, as we are seeing in the European countries who are allowing the Muslim savages in the door by the thousands. And they, I mean the governments of these countries, don’t really seem to be learning anything from the experience. And for that they will most probably perish.

  • Drew the Infidel

    What we are witnessing is the politicized courts beginning to play fast and loose with the Constitution on the heels of the untimely passing of Justice Scalia. This accentuates the importance of not allowing Obhammud to pick his replacement by clamor.

    • ______________

      What we are witnessing is liberal treason – by giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Liberal treason running the courts.

  • Anyone check that judge’s bank account lately? If MUSLIM SLIME can have ads like that on a frigging bus so should the MTA!! I guess we are now in a country that has no FIRST AMMENDMENT-welcome to OSLIMA LAND!!

  • Timmy John

    Muslims bullying Pamela, I protest against that. An article Aginst Muslims bullying Pamela
    http://aneyeonnews.blogspot.ie/2016/03/typicalmuslim-behaviourbullying-pamela.html

  • Sr

    Who is that hot woman holding the banner?

  • stephen powell

    The issue is not Islam. Islam has been locked in intellectual and moral stasis for a thousand years. The issue is the collapse of governance in Western democracies.

Pin It on Pinterest