The ideological impetus behind judicial developments in the last two areas , campaign finance and equal-time provisions , is related less to speech , except as a kind of constitutional cover , than to a revival of the old right to property--that is , the Supreme Court tends to disapprove of legislative and administrative efforts to require broadcasters to carry opposing viewpoints on the grounds that since it 's their property , owners of television stations should be able to broadcast what they like .
The Supreme Court doesn 't like efforts to change what broadcasters do with what they air on the weekends .