Obama's talking points on legality of Massachusetts "buffer zone" were rejected 9-0 in the Supreme Court

Even the Supreme Court, not exactly the bastion of orthodoxy and common sense, unanimously rejected Obama's amicus brief in McCullen v Coakley.

Not a single sitting Justice bought into it. The 'buffer zone' was even described as 'unconstitutional'.

But even a fool could see the Massachusetts 'buffer zone' statute violated constitutional law that pertain to free speech.

The highest ranking official in the United States and upholder of the Constitution had his lawyers produce an amicus brief he knew was unconstitutional.

It is mind boggling.

The Constitution of the United States is a gonner in Massachusetts. We have not had access to US Constitutional rights for at least five years. Possibly more - time flies when you're having fun.

I have a friend who will often say - Massachusetts is where liberty began in this country and where liberty will end, where slavery was overthrown and where it will be reinstituted.

Cardinal O'Malley issued a press release saying they are tickled pink by the SCOTUS ruling.

The press release comes as a surprise to the prolife community in Boston.

To the best of our knowledge, at no time did they ever lift a pinky to assist Bill Cotter at Boston's Operation Rescue, Eleanor McCullen or the legal team. The Mass Catholic Conference was nowhere to be found. There was no amicus brief submitted on their behalf. He has never joined those in prayer outside of the clinic and has in fact, treated these heroic prolifers like his closet relatives.

Also, as our friends at BCI have pointed out, the press release comes across as hypocritical given the Cardinal is gaga for proabortion politicians. (It is also interesting to note that the "Ethicspoint" complaint system is a complete sham.)