US supreme court strikes down animal cruelty law

[meggo]

i think this is disgusting. my2c.

[from the G&M]

Link

The Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that a U.S. law that makes it a crime to sell videos of animals being tortured or killed violated constitutional free-speech rights.

By an 8-1 vote, the court struck down the 1999 animal cruelty law for infringing on free-speech protections guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Congress adopted the law in an attempt to stop people from profiting by the interstate sale of depictions of torture and killing of animals. It was mainly aimed at “crush†videos in which women in high-heeled shoes step on small animals as a type of sexual fetish.

Opponents of the law had argued it was too broad and too vague, making illegal some videos of blood sports like bullfighting and even some documentaries. They said it should be struck down as a form of government censorship.

Writing for the court majority, Chief Justice John Roberts agreed that the law was substantially too broad and therefore invalid under the First Amendment.

While the prohibition of animal cruelty has a long history in American law, there is no evidence of a similar tradition prohibiting depictions of such cruelty, Justice Roberts wrote in the 20-page opinion.

The ruling was a victory for Robert Stevens of Virginia, who made and sold three videos of pit bulls fighting each other and attacking hogs and wild boars.

His 2005 conviction was the first in the country under the law. Mr. Stevens was sentenced to 37 months in prison, but he has yet to start his sentence while his case was on appeal.

Attorneys for Mr. Stevens said his sentence was 14 months longer than professional football player Michael Vick’s prison term for running a dog-fighting ring. Mr. Vick has served his sentence and has resumed his career.

Laws in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, along with various other federal laws, already ban animal cruelty.

U.S. Justice Department lawyers had argued animal cruelty videos should be treated like child pornography, not entitled to any constitutional protection. Usually, videos and other depictions are protected as free speech, even if they show abhorrent conduct.

Only Justice Samuel Alito dissented. He said the law could be validly applied to at least two broad categories of expression -- “crush†videos and dog-fighting videos.

[Esau.]

I agree it's disgusting, but sadly it doesn't surprise me. This is a country where people claim they would willing die defending an organization who assemble in public, masked and spew hate. All in the name of the first amendment.

I love my American friends and all, but I don't know if I'll ever really understand them.

[Thorgnor]

word...

sad news...

[SaggyBalls]

Upholding the law could potentially be used as a reason to pervert just depictions of other acts of animal cruelty.

"Attorneys for Mr. Stevens said his sentence was 14 months longer than professional football player Michael Vick’s prison term for running a dog-fighting ring. Mr. Vick has served his sentence and has resumed his career."

Certainly a great example of how this rule absolutely upheld is a perversion of the concept of justice.

[meggo]

yeah i agree it's not perfect YT, it could probably use some amendments. the idea of people out there who do these fucked up things just sickens me and i do not think *this* is an appropriate expression of 'free speech.'

[SaggyBalls]

Though you're probably not out of line, once we set limits on 'appropriate', these limits will change.

[meggo]

when will animal cruelty be 'appropriate'? i don't think that one will change much.

[Esau.]

If you are caught fighting dogs in the US, your looking at criminal charges and jail time. So basically if you don't get caught, and make a video of the whole thing your protected by the first amendment and able to profit from it. Legally.

That's messed up.

[nibbler]

I suppose one could argue the free speech angle in that PETA videos may be threatened by such legislation. After all, their videos of the every day operations at factory farms, slaughterhouses, and animal testing labs contain clear and vomit-inducing evidence of animal cruelty as our everyday way of life. One doesnt need to go out of their way to wager on a dog fight to be contributing to the economy of animal cruelty. Buying a burger or some chicken nuggets is all it takes.

Its gonna take a whole lotta carrot and stick to evolve past where we our more-faster-cheaper society seems to be stuck on this issue.

And what a fucked up issue it is!

[Kanada Kev]

Hey, what about the 12 states that aren't protecting animals from THIS kind of cruelty:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/07/florida-anti-bestiality-l_n_568042.html

This dude could have gotten off (in more ways than one) if he had only lived in Florida:

http://www.jambands.ca/sanctuary/showtopic.php?tid/256862/

Florida ... where it's ok for a man and a woman to have sex ... where it's ok for a man and a goat (female or male?) to have sex ... but whoa stop, homosexuals are not allowed to!