There has been growing criticism (and falling poll numbers) of Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger after she ran as a moderate and then immediately veered to the far left after her election. Once in power, Spanberger and the Democrats unleashed a slew of tax increases, moved to eliminate all but one Republican district in the purple state, passed an array of anti-gun laws, and enacted other controversial measures. One of these measures is a clearly unconstitutional effort to strip pro-Confederate groups of their tax exemption.
This week, Spanberger signed HB167, the law that eliminated the tax exemption for various confederacy-linked groups, including the Virginia Division of the United Daughters of the Confederacy, the General Organization of the United Daughters of the Confederacy, the Confederate Memorial Literary Society, the Stonewall Jackson Memorial, Incorporated, the Virginia Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, and the J.E.B. Stuart Birthplace Preservation Trust, Inc.
Notably, as soon as they came into power, Democrats also passed House Bill 1377 to move against the Virginia Military Institute, including appointing a task force that could effectively close the historic school. Many Democrats have previoulsy sought to close VMI despite its unique and inspiring history in training some of our most famous military leaders, including General George Marshall. Liberals want to close the school due to its history from the Civil War.
Spanberger recently expressed support for the effort but returned the bill with suggestions to use the board of directors to carry out the review.
Spanberger’s substitute eliminates that task force entirely and instead directs VMI’s own board of visitors to carry out the review.
The board would be empowered to carry out a fairly hostile and open-ended agenda, including to “distance [VMI] from the Lost Cause narrative, foster an inclusive environment, and address any other concerns.” Spanberger has appointed 27 new board members, including former Gov. Ralph Northam, who is viewed as hostile to VMI.
The New York Times explained that the Democrats wanted to “distance Virginia from its Confederate past.” However, they also want to use a content-based law to discriminate against groups with which they disagree. The law clearly violates the First Amendment, but neither Spanberger nor the Virginia Democrats appear to care.
In Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 576 U.S. 155 (2015), the Court struck down a signage regulation because”restrictions … that apply to any given sign [depend] entirely on the communicative content of the sign.” Likewise, Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of the N.Y. State Crime Victims Bd., 502 U.S. 105, 116 (1991), the Court stressed that the government’s ability to impose content-based burdens on speech raises the specter that the government may effectively drive certain ideas or viewpoints from the marketplace.
From taxes to trademarks, content-based discrimination runs afoul of our free speech values. In Matal v. Tam, 582 U.S. 218 (2017), the Court cited Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes decision in United States v. Schwimmer, 279 U. S. 644, 655 (1929), that “the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express ‘the thought that we hate.'”
Over 30 years ago, I wrote about the collision between anti-discrimination laws and the free exercise of religion. I have been critical of the use of the tax code to effectively punish organizations that do not comport with the IRS’s view of good public policy.
That prior work was critical of the 1982 decision involving Bob Jones University, in which the Supreme Court upheld the denial of tax-exempt status. In the case of Bob Jones, the university was engaged in reprehensible racial discrimination. However, I wrote how the actual standard is far more vague and could potentially be used more broadly.
Virginia is an example of precisely that problem in the use of tax exemptions to engage in viewpoint discrimination.
I have opposed such moves with a variety of organizations with which I have long-standing objections. That includes the Administration’s threat to revoke Harvard University’s tax-exempt status.
Tax exemption should not be a status bestowed upon those adhering to the demands of whatever party is in power. Free speech and associational rights are fostered by granting this status.
Virginia will now spend additional money to defend this unconstitutional action and fight for the right to discriminate against those who have opposing views in the state.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
OT:LET’S TAKE A WALK THROUGH HISTORY.
Are we in American going to learn what not to do when we know the real history of Islam?
Every country in which political Islam takes power – the civilization collapses. This is history, not a political opinion.
Be sure to watch the entire video, so you will know the truth fo what actually happened.
https://x.com/BelannF/status/1994064933642707174?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1994064933642707174%7Ctwgr%5Ec9a1074379ae46d59b081f7dd3f60bc31f817d54%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.israelunwired.com%2Fthe-most-damning-video-ever-made-about-islam%2F
Many countries that were not taken by Islam have also collapsed. Germany, for example. Reconstituted into Naziism. Went on to kill millions – a perfect example of a Christian nation.
It’s not the religion – it’s the leaders.
Spandberger veered FAR Left. All the Democrats are running as moderates (Except for in New York because the state is mostly Commie Dems now and they don’t need to), but are Trojan Horses and there is NOTHING moderate about them, they are full on Communists once they get elected. Hopefully the American People will see through their gaslighting and lies leading up to the midterms and not vote them in, they will push for more impeachments because that’s all they know, they have ZERO positive agenda for the country and to the contrary seek to re-implement all the dangerous anti-American freedom killing, economy killing, open border, DEI and Woke policies of the Biden Administration that have divided our nation since Obama.
we warned everyone she was running a false flag campaign to appear moderate and the shlubs voted for her without the least bit of research on the web about her
OT, it’s been clear Trump’s gambit in Iran is about China just as much as it is about preventing the Ayatollahs from getting a nuke (which they would use the same day they got it). But even focusing on China is maybe a little too myopic. Perhaps it is about building a “greater North America” that stretches from Venezuela to Greenland, and creates a “fotress America” for generations into the future.
One constitutional aspect of this case unlike other U.S. Supreme Court rulings on First Amendment speech. Should Virginia taxpayers be forced to subsidize (pay for) constitutionally-subversive groups? Groups promoting foreign models of government still have First Amendment speech rights, but can you force taxpayers to pay for these constitutionally-subversive groups?
Republicans in the 1950’s strongly and forcefully opposed suspected constitutional-subversives during the McCarthy hearing led by Republican Joe McCarthy. Republicans falsely accused many innocent Americans using taxpayer dollars of being constitutional-subversives (attempting to subvert America’s model of government).
Since the 1700’s, each and every one of America’s enemies – which we fought wars using American blood & treasure – each enemy had a foreign style Oath of Office. These foreign enemies had a supreme loyalty oath (Oath of Office) to a single person (Nazi Germany) or supreme loyalty to a political party (communist block nations) or supreme loyalty to a religion (imperial Japan during World War Two and Iran since the 1950’s). Trump actually hired Roy Cohn, who interrogated and investigated suspected constitutional-subversives (like communists and neo-confederates). Now Trump supports constitutional-subversives.
The 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments were ratified after the American Civil War to counter the constitutional-subversives of the Confederacy. These post-civil war amendments were designed to force local sheriffs and government officials to respect the constitutional rights of African-Americans.
Jim Crow laws and practices were constitutionally-subversive (disloyal to the American Oath of Office and U.S. Constitution which now included the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments). Subversive local sheriffs and government officials disloyal to their constitutional Oath of Office, which forced presidents like Eisenhower, Truman and Obama (Ferguson, Missouri) to legally intervene with federal officials.
One former Confederate General James Longstreet received the amnesty forgiveness deal from the American government. The deal was former Confederates would be forgiven (not executed or imprisoned) and could even serve in the American government with one condition: they could only serve in government (police officers, clerks, judges, legislators, governors and even presidents) if they swore supreme loyalty to the U.S. Constitution (which now included the 13th, 14th, 15th Amendments protecting African-Americans and all Americans).
General James Longstreet was virtually the only former-confederate that honored the amnesty deal. Longstreet was only loyal American to his Oath of Office. Longstreet as part of the American military even protected African-Americans after the Civil War.
Longstreet, the most loyal former-confederate general has almost no monuments in any southern state for over 150 years. In Richmond, VA the former Capital of the Confederacy there are no statues or monuments to Longstreet (where Spanberger is Governor). The reason why is that most neo-confederates still support a constitutionally-subversive foreign model of government.
Many Southerners have family members that were forced to serve in the Civil War. They should be proud of those ancestors (low rank soldiers) since they had little choice to protect their homes. Confederate groups have a First Amendment right to support constitutionally-subversive foreign models of government. They don’t have a right to have us pay for it.
Confederate civil war veterans fought for and were awarded veterans benefits. Most Southern soldiers were not forced, they fought for what they believed were their rights, States rights. This is just another political stunt attempt to get the Democrats slaves back on the plantation, divide and agitate.
As the civil war is falsely framed about the humanitarian north fighting the oppression of the slaving South you must ask this question. Why did Grant, Sherman, Cook, Sheridan, Custer and many other Union veterans and their Banker Masters immediately aim their attention westward to practice total warfare against the plains Indians. They killed their families, destroyed their cultures, displaced them from their lands, indoctrinated their children at reservation schools all in the name of humanity?!
Coincidence that faithful, enduring are declining as the equal idea of association rages. Boy scouts, girl scouts will dissolve away and the scouts, too. Marriage will dissolve. Guess such were bad ideas from the beginning and deserve dissolution just as “america” will dissolve and all other such associations, bad cultures. Allegiance and loyalty false ideas, too. Truth was always a lie. No one knew what any of it was so it dissolved.
/s
Predicting doom is the voice of the loser, the quitter. Achievers express what they want to see happen, and say they’re expecting it (though the timeframe may be vague).
Elect a spook and you get lied to? No way Jose.
The New York Times explained that the Democrats wanted to “distance Virginia from its Confederate past.”
The statement should have been “distance Virginia from its role in the development of the United States Constitution”. How the Commonwealth will bear this shame is beyond comprehension.
With due respect to the New York Times, the election of the former CIA officer whose questionable security clearance took over 4 years and who was allowed to resign over performed operations within the United States against US Citizens that violates the US Constitution rather than undergo a formal investigation, Governor Spanberger has declared war on the United States democracy and has the full support of the Commonwealth of Virginia’s “democratic process”.
“We are gonna fight it legislatively. We are gonna fight it in the courts. And we’re gonna fight it in the streets.” — Hakeem Jeffries (illustrative of the current Democrat party message).y
Stated simply, “anyone we say so, can make the law, act upon the law, and enforce the law in any manor they deem appropriate – completely independently of the Executive, Legislative, or Judicial branches”.
There will be no voice, no role, no rights or privilege to anyone who is now required to sew a star on their coat and take the train to Dachau to spend the rest of their lives in slavery, disease, and starvation.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/markjoyella/2023/10/06/hillary-clinton-suggests-formal-deprogramming-for-maga-extremists-who-still-support-trump/
Out kind host is flatout wong. Commenter X has explained why.
INSTANT NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER
On the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, law professor, legal analyst, and bestselling author of The Indispensable Right Jonathan Turley explores how the unique origins of American democracy set it apart from other revolutions, whether it can survive and thrive in the 21st century, and how the unfinished story of the revolution will play out in a rapidly changing world.
What set American democracy apart was its establishment as a severely restricted-vote republic.
Turnout in 1788 was 11.6%, by design; voters must have been male, European, and 21 with 50 lbs. Sterling or 50 acres.
Democracy has been of the restricted-vote variety since its inception in Greece in 508 B.C., when only about 20% of the population was enabled to vote.
Women and the poor had no need or rationale to vote; they still do not.
Women have a duty to their nation to make its citizens (they have failed America), and workers are not vested.
A bit too prejudiced based on immutable characteristics (men v. women). Why not make it so the vote has to be EARNED? Meritocratic without bringing in immutables. For example, military service should count, even it it doesn’t result in wealth.
How many Constitutional heathens will it take before the parties’ breviary is exposed as a hymn not to law and order, but to tyranny? The Democratic Party’s leadership is well adept in Mimicry and in the broadest sense Bi-Polar, spreading false pollen to their brethren spiced with the sweet honey of singular sovereignty: ‘We are the One’s!’.
Beware of promises made by a Tyrant, history has shown tyranny is two faced where truth could be false.
GW: With regard to history, that answer is already apparent to your statement: “How many Constitutional heathens will it take before the parties’ breviary is exposed as a hymn not to law and order, but to tyranny?
Answer: At least 3 generations – look at the history of the creation and tyranny of the United Soviet Socialist Republic.
The American Founders had had enough and secured their resolve.
It took a mere three years from the Boston Tea Party, December 16, 1773, to the Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.
Liberals want to close the
schoolDemocrat Party due to its history from the Civil War.If only…..
Secession is prohibited because secession is not prohibited.