The bottom line is that I think there is a double standard between how liberal and conservative views are treated. The linked article explains my view. I am just trying to call out when I see that double standard and this thread it was pretty obvious.

And I just think you are plain wrong on the "1930s" argument being hyperbole. In summary, from the 1930s-June 2018 economic regulation was not able to be challenged on constitutional grounds. This was because the history of the 1880s-1930s was that decisions on economic regulations were made based on the policy preferences of the jugdes rather any real principle. Now the Supreme Court has opened the door to challenge economic policies (to include health and safety) under the First Amendment. This is not being hyperbolic. Do you agree?

The prediction that liberals are making is that there is no way to make these decisions without using policy preferences. We know what the policy preferences of the majority of the Supreme Court are, and thus we are worried that First Amendment jurisprudence will be used as a weapon to attack "liberal" (I use that term widelya lot of policies that I think will be attacked are not considered liberal today but are things that people take for granted) economic policies. Perhaps this is a bad theory. But the door has clearly been opened, it has been used to attack liberal causes twice already, and we have the past as a guide. I don't think it is hyperbole to think it will continue. What reasons do we have to think it will stop?

Edit: And now my other post posted late...plus it deleted my links. Or maybe the world is really ending after today and this is proof.
[Post edited by BonsackHoo at 06/27/2018 9:13PM]