Supreme Court and free speech
: The Supreme Court just blocked a law aimed at pornographers as a likely unconstitutional slap at free speech.
The court was divided and sent the case back to a lower court. But even in the case of pornography and children, the court stood behind free speech as a principle, an American ultimate, that requires protection. And if the Court protects free speech against even pornography and children, surely it will protect free speech against the indecent indecency legislation about to be signed by Bush.
“There is a potential for extraordinary harm and a serious chill upon protected speech” if the law took effect, Justice Kennedy wrote for the majority.
: UPDATE: Here’s Ernie Miller’s take on the decision. And here’s Eugene Volokh on the issue of prurient interest. And here’s Jack Balkin, who also says:
Putting together Justice Thomas’ opinion in Hamdi with his vote in ACLU v. Ashcroft, we may infer that the President can throw any citizen in a military prison indefinitely, but that the citizen has the right to view pornography while there.
Don’t you just love having your very own constitutional law experts at the ready?
: UPDATE: Henry sends me this great quote from Dennis Miller:
“The Senate overwhelmingly agreed on a bill Tuesday to fine broadcasters as much as $3 million a day for racy language. Oh, yeah? Well guess what, FCC. I’m still going to say whatever I want. So don’t intercourse with me.”
