In the decade of debate leading to the Supreme Court’s 2010 landmark ruling in McDonald v. City of Chicago, there was a constant background theme in support of the reasoned contention that the United States Constitution does, indeed, apply in Chicago.
It was this: A government allowed to exempt itself from one Amendment in the Bill of Rights, will inevitably demonstrate contempt for others.
Not surprisingly, the city of Chicago fulfilled this prophecy by resisting the Supreme Court’s ruling that a blanket ban on private gun ownership is unconstitutional.
Not surprisingly, the media, particularly in Chicago, never seemed to grasp this background theme, to recognize how dangerous it is to allow a government to cherry pick through the Bill of Rights and deign what it will, and what it will not, uphold.
It was too subtle, too theoretical, too “big picture.”
Therefore, the media, particularly in Chicago, never saw how inevitable the prophecy was — until March 19, when two reporters were briefly detained and told by a police officer, “Your First Amendment rights can be terminated.”
In itself, a minor irony. But this is not an isolated occurrence. It is symptomatic of a city government that holds the U.S. Constitution in contempt.
Perhaps now, finally, the media, particularly in Chicago, will see that such a government is worthy of its contempt.
For more, go to:
— Chicago cop: ‘Your First Amendment rights can be terminated…’