Let me paraphrase a bit from a Washington Post editorial:
Many states already have agreements to recognize newspaper licenses from other jurisdictions. Virginia, for example, honors licenses from 27 other states that have similarly robust standards; Maryland, which strictly regulates what newspapers may be sold, and the District, which essentially prohibits it, do not recognize out-of-state licenses. These are legitimate choices that would be overridden by a federal legislature that too easily bends to the will of the news lobby. Nevada, a strong press-rights state, rescinded its agreement with Utah because Utah does not require training in acceptable viewpoints. Why should Congress to overrule that judgment?
Just saying, WaPo. Careful how you treat the Bill of Rights. It’s not a buffet, from which you can load up your plate with parts you enjoy, and spit in the parts that you don’t. After Heller and McDonald declares then fundamental constitutional rights, no different than other rights in that family, that’s going to necessarily have consequences, and this is one of them.
Wait, “newspaper licenses”? So does the first amendment require a permit like the second amendment now?
Oh I just got the joke. I’ll get back to work.
Sebastian,
Maybe you should do a find-and-replace on that article and submit it as a letter to the editor.
That’ll frost ’em!
Yeah, what Sebastian said.
Also, Sebastian, if we ever get the chance to have dinner, nothing personal, but I want to go through the buffet line first, OK?
Yeah, when I don’t like the Salisbury Steak, I really make sure to express my displeasure :)
Well, in states where there are journalist “shield” laws there’s sorry of licensing for journalists, in that covered journalists can do that which non-journalists cannot, namely flout court orders
College newspapers are heavily licensed and regulated.
Liberals don’t have any qualms about restricting every right; they just don’t have the power to do it.