Supreme Court Backs Stealing?
How Appealing has reported on the case. Angry Clam seems to think so, as does Justice Scalia, Rehnquist, Kennedy and Thomas. I had to read through it a couple times to understand, but the decision delt with people who were forced to put their money from an escrow account, that would essentially not earn interest because of fees, into an account to earn interest to pay for people that were too poor to defend themselves. The majority Justices said that because there was no significant loss to property that no rights were broken. The dissent called it a Robin Hood action by the government and that it forces some to fund ideas they may not agree with, therefore making it a 1st Amendment issue to look at in the future.