Over the last few months more and more liberal Attorney Generals have been dropping hints that they might soon be looking to criminalize man made global warming skepticism. Several state AG’s and the federal AG herself, Loretta Lynch, have all openly discussed the idea of bringing criminal action against those Americans who actively voice their disagreement with the prevailing liberal orthodoxy on Climate Change.
Attorney and blogger Glenn Harlan Reynolds has some interesting analysis for us on this subject at USA Today:
Federal law makes it a felony “for two or more persons to agree together to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).”
I wonder if U.S. Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude Walker, or California Attorney General Kamala Harris, or New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman have read this federal statute. Because what they’re doing looks like a concerted scheme to restrict the First Amendment free speech rights of people they don’t agree with. They should look up 18 U.S.C. Sec. 241, I am sure they each have it somewhere in their offices.
Here’s what’s happened so far. First, Schneiderman and reportedly Harris sought to investigate Exxon in part for making donations to groups and funding research by individuals who think “climate change” is either a hoax, or not a problem to the extent that people like Harris and Schneiderman say it is.
This investigation, which smacks of Wisconsin’s discredited Putin-style legal assault on conservative groups and their contributors, was denounced by the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Hans Bader as unconstitutional. Bader wrote:
Should government officials be able to cut off donations to groups because they employ people disparaged as “climate change deniers?” … Only a single-issue zealot with ideological blinders and a contempt for the First Amendment would think so. …
The First Amendment has long been interpreted as protecting corporate lobbying and donations, even to groups that allegedly deceive the public about important issues. … So even if being a “climate denier” were a crime (rather than constitutionally protected speech, as it in fact is), a donation to a non-profit that employs such a person would not be.
While I don’t expect the realization, this collusion against our free speech is a clearly criminal action to deter liberals from pushing to kill the 1st Amendment. I do hope that revelation will help conservatives become more bold about fighting back against such speech destroying conversations. There is simply no excuse for anyone in the media to be allowing liberals to defend this attack on free speech without receiving pushback for doing so. Conservative pundits on all of the major networks should be bringing this up in their appearances, and conservative journalists should be forcing Loretta Lynch to respond to the idea that she is actively involved in a criminal conspiracy.
Our freedoms are in danger, folks. The 1st, 2nd, 4th and 10th Amendments (among others) are under constant attack from the left in Obama’s America, and if we don’t start fighting back we will begin to lose more ground. The perfect case in point has been the recent string of legal defeats we’ve faced as the left has sought to destroy our religious freedom. If we don’t stand up now, we’ll lose our right to free speech and free press as well…
It’s time to fight.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com