Simply Unbelievable but true...WOW

[ArchAngel]

Contrary to what some might want to believe:

People do have the right to say they don't want to speak on camera or have themselves recorded.

Whether it was a smart political move for him is a different issue. He clearly has the right to tell the press to go f*ck themselves - freedom of speech AND freedom of the press does not imply that everyone has to submit to the media.

 

[Pabst]

Quote from Nolan-Vinny-Sam:

LOL...Cmon man, I'd think you could do better than this. ET is not the CityClub nor there are Justices here posting, paid by our tax dollars. Trying to slam a poster for using an alias on ET should be beneath you... But I digress on this issue....

Please explain your reasoning:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from Pabst:

I think one has a right to ban their own speech! Like many Justice's, Scalia prefers the dignity of not having his mug broadcast. WTF, prior to television did man not exist?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll ask again,
If a person's picture or as you call it "mug" in this case (interesting label for Scalia's face), is viewed on television, then that person is losing his dignity??

Note: I don't care for a food fight, only trying to understand your reasoning on this....

NVS, I do think it's undignified for Judge's to put themselves in the press. Much the same way I burn up at Prosecuter's using the media to shape public opinion. As far as Scalia being paid by tax dollars...well he's entitled to his personal space. When I see a Clinton-Monica video for sale then I'll perhaps change my view of what's personal and what's public.......

 

[Madison]

sure - if he's speaking at a private event, he is not under any obligation to broadcast his speech.

this one (different scalia incident) is a bit trickier - although it was private ceremony, the seizure was performed by a government agent....

During Scalia's speech Wednesday in Hattiesburg about the Constitution, a woman who identified herself as Deputy Marshal Melanie Rube demanded that a reporter for the Associated Press erase a digital recording of the justice's comments.

The reporter, Denise Grones, initially resisted, but later showed the deputy how to erase the recording after the officer took the device from her. Rube also made a Hattiesburg American reporter erase her tape.

...

But Rube's boss, Nehemiah Flowers, the US marshal for the Southern District of Mississippi, defended the deputy's actions, saying yesterday that one of the service's responsibilities is to provide a traveling Supreme Court justice with security.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/04/10/us_marshal_defends_scalia_speech_erasure/