John Maginnis' analysis regarding the lawsuit filed by Royal Alexander demonstrates a complete lack of legal acumen. Maginnis asserts Alexander filed a lawsuit seeking a temporary restraining order to cease the broadcast of a television commercial that contained lies without a working knowledge of the First Amendment. On the contrary, Alexander knew the courts were hesitant to enjoin false or slanderous political advertisements; however, many of the cases contained strong dissenting opinions.
The law is not static. It evolves as courts recognize past precedents are no longer workable or, as in the case of school segregation, the courts determine that the existing law is in conflict with our constitutional democracy. To attack a person who argues for a change in the law by asserting that person does not have a working understanding of said law is overly simplistic and demonstrates an ignorance of the role of the courts in our democracy.