<story><title>US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amendment Rights</title><url>https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/01/24/assa-j24.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>SllX</author><text>Horseshit.&lt;p&gt;The Bill of Rights is descriptive of &lt;i&gt;some&lt;/i&gt; of the natural rights of men, not prescriptive. The reason it exists at all was to satisfy people who quite rightly thought that without the extra legal insulation a malicious Congress or government would trample all over them.&lt;p&gt;Go read the 1st Amendment, it’s right here:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;i&gt;Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;The first five words are “Congress shall make no law”, or basically, this isn’t a &lt;i&gt;grant&lt;/i&gt; given to the people, this is a restriction on the type of laws Congress is allowed to pass, and if Congress can’t pass a law, then a President can’t enforce it because it doesn’t constitutionally exist!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>MereInterest</author><text>It&amp;#x27;s also worth adding that this wording makes it extend beyond the US borders.  If the US Constitution granted rights to individuals, it would only apply to individuals under the US Constitution.  Instead, it makes a blanket assumption that the freedom of speech exists, and that while other governments may restrict it, Congress may not.  For example, overseas funding for HIV&amp;#x2F;AIDS may not be conditional on recipients having a strict anti-prostitution policy, as that would violate the free speech of the recipients[1].&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Agency_for_International_Development_v._Alliance_for_Open_Society_International,_Inc&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&amp;#x2F;wiki&amp;#x2F;Agency_for_International_Devel...&lt;/a&gt;.</text></comment>
<story><title>US Department of Justice Argues Assange Has No First Amendment Rights</title><url>https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/01/24/assa-j24.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>SllX</author><text>Horseshit.&lt;p&gt;The Bill of Rights is descriptive of &lt;i&gt;some&lt;/i&gt; of the natural rights of men, not prescriptive. The reason it exists at all was to satisfy people who quite rightly thought that without the extra legal insulation a malicious Congress or government would trample all over them.&lt;p&gt;Go read the 1st Amendment, it’s right here:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;i&gt;Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;The first five words are “Congress shall make no law”, or basically, this isn’t a &lt;i&gt;grant&lt;/i&gt; given to the people, this is a restriction on the type of laws Congress is allowed to pass, and if Congress can’t pass a law, then a President can’t enforce it because it doesn’t constitutionally exist!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>saalweachter</author><text>It is also worth repeating, from time to time, the Ninth Amendment: &amp;quot;The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.&amp;quot;</text></comment>