Jack. It's not. The problem is, it's. You're choosing which direction. This is a 1989 Jack. You are putting forward. You're putting forward a. Jack, let me finish my thought. You're putting forward a legal theory that nobody agrees with in the entire federal bench. There's only really two ways. Free speech absolutism or speech restrictionism on European style. So you have to choose kind of which navigational path to go on. (35:20–35:27)
CLAIM
Asserts that a specific legal theory is not supported by any federal judges.
This is an excerpt from a raw transcript. The assertions have not been audited or verified. Tap the video to view the source footage and understand the context.
