RE: Federal Judge Orders White House To Temporarily Restore Press Access To Jim Acosta
November 18, 2018 at 9:01 pm
(November 18, 2018 at 8:45 pm)Tiberius Wrote: @RoadRunner79 go back and read my post regarding the "under the law" part of that amendment. You think it means that the amendment only applies to matters of law. It does not. It means that the government can't deprive someone of life, liberty, or property without a legally defined process.
That is to say, the government can't kill a citizen...unless they follow a legal process (e.g. a trial -> conviction by jury -> death penalty judgement -> appeals process -> execution).
In the case of Acosta, the government revoked his press pass. Acosta challenged the government in court, and in court, the government couldn't say which process they'd followed to revoke his press pass. That alone means the action was unconstitutional. However even if they had followed a process, did they allow Acosta to appeal? If not, then again, they would be acting unconstitutionally.
So is a press pass a privilege, or a right. If it is a right, then doesn't it apply to all? I don't see where this is a matter under the law.... no one has pointed to any legal process it would be under. What process would they have to go through to deny my entrance into the white house such that Acosta has. I think they would just say no.
It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. - Alexander Vilenkin
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther