Yes, the Renton (Wash.) city prosecutor’s office concludes, applying the Washington “cyberstalking” statute — an excellent example of the dangers of the broad “cyberbullying” and “harassment” statutes that I have often condemned. KIRO-TV reports: The Renton City Prosecutor wants to send a cartoonist to jail for mocking the police department in a series of animated […]
Archive | Freedom of Speech
Utah Trial Court Rejects “Negligent Directions” Claim Against Google
The decision is Rosenberg v. Harwood (Utah Dist. Ct. May 27, 2001); it’s two months old, but I just saw it because it was just posted on Westlaw. Here’s an excerpt: Plaintiff Lauren Rosenberg alleges that Defendant Google negligently provided her with walking directions that directed her to cross State Route 224 (SR 224), a […]
Ninth Circuit Panel Holds That Oakland Discriminatorily Enforced 8-Foot No-Approach Zone Outside Abortion Clinic
From Hoye v. City of Oakland, handed down today: Within [100-foot zones around entrances to reproductive health clinics,] the [Oakland] Ordinance makes it an offense knowingly and willfully to approach within eight feet of an individual seeking entry to the clinic if one’s purpose in approaching that person is to engage in conversation, protest, counseling, […]
Woman Being Prosecuted for Displaying Plastic Testicles on Her Car
No, really. South Carolina bans obscene or indecent bumper stickers and similar “device[s]”, providing that a person may be fined for “operat[ing] a motor vehicle in this State which has affixed or attached to any part of the motor vehicle which is visible to members of the public not occupying the vehicle any sticker, decal, […]
Court Dismisses Prosecution for Leaving Nasty Voice-Mails for Prosecutor, Suggests New York Telephone Harassment Statute Is Facially Unconstitutional
The case is People v. Louis, a New York trial court case decided Wednesday. This seems consistent with United States v. Popa (D.C. Cir. 1999), discussed in this post, and also (though the analogy is less direct, given the difference in the statutes involved) with the Nebraska Supreme Court People v. Drahota decision). The defendant […]
No First Amendment Right to Bark at a Police Dog
So an Ohio trial court judge held last Friday in State v. Stephens. There had been an earlier case on the subject in Ohio, State v. Gilchrist (Ohio Ct. App. 2003), and the Gilchrist trial judge found that applying the law to the defendant did violate the First Amendment, a decision that the state apparently […]
Which Part of “Make No Law” Don’t I Understand?
I’ve heard many people argue that “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press” means that all speech restrictions — or at least all federal speech restrictions — are unconstitutional, period. Which part of “make no law” don’t you understand?, some people colorfully argue. Well, I understand “make […]
Unprotected Solicitation of Crime or Protected Advocacy of Crime?
Marty Lederman (Balkinization) blogs about an indictment that raises very important First Amendment issues. Count 1 charges defendant with urging terrorist activity — that’s the solicitation vs. advocacy question. Count 2 charges defendant with linking to bombmaking instructions, with the intent that they be used for criminal purposes (an issue I discuss, among others, in […]
Defendant’s Looking at Playboy and Girls Gone Wild as Sentencing Factor
In State v. Epling (Utah. Ct. App. July 21, 2011), defendant pleaded no contest to three charges of sexually abusing his stepson, and was sentenced to three consecutive 1-to-15-year prison terms. Here’s one passage that struck me as particularly interesting: Epling also objects to the trial court’s expressed concern about his involvement with “pornography.” According […]
Never Transmit False Data in Rhode Island
R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-52-7(b) makes it a misdemeanor to “intentionally or knowingly” “make[] a transmission of false data,” or to “make[], present[] or use[] or cause[] to be made, presented or used any data for any other purpose with knowledge of its falsity.” Section 11-52-6 also makes violators civilly liable, including for punitive damages. […]
Ninth Circuit Panel Reverses Conviction for Allegedly Threatening to Kill Then-Candidate Obama
The case is this morning’s United States v. Bagdasarian (decided by a 2-to-1 vote). On October 22, 2008, when Barack Obama’s election was looking more and more likely, Bagdasarian, under the username “californiaradial,” joined a “Yahoo! Finance — American International Group” message board, on which members of the public posted messages concerning financial matters, AIG, […]
Hoaxes and the First Amendment
Haley v. State, decided July 8 by the Georgia Supreme Court, is the latest case dealing with the thorny problem of the First Amendment and knowingly false statements of fact. Andrew Scott Haley apparently created an online hoax: The evidence at trial, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, showed that Haley, under […]
“Father Shall Take Down That Web Site and Shall Never on Any Public Media Make Any Reference to Mother At All,”
“nor any reference to the relationship between mother and children, nor shall he make any reference to his children other than ‘happy birthday’ or other significant school events.” That’s the text of a judge’s oral order in Morelli v. Morelli, No. A06-04-60750-C (Diane Gibbons, J., Bucks Cty., Pa. June 6, 2011). If the father says […]
Litigation Over Seizure of Photographer’s Camera
I just ran across a procedural decision in this litigation — Blackden v. New Hampshire State Police (D.N.H. July 8, 2011) — and thought that our readers who follow such issues might want to know about it. The decision itself is focused on whether a federal court may intervene at this point, given the ongoing […]
Buying Search Engine Placement Triggered by a Competitor’s Name
Habush v. Cannon, 2011 WL 2477236 (June 8), holds that such purchases can’t be enjoined under Wisconsin “right of publicity” law. Plaintiffs, Robert L. Habush and Daniel A. Rottier, are personal injury lawyers and partners in Habush Habush & Rottier. Defendants, William M. Cannon and Patrick O. Dunphy, are plaintiffs’ competitors, and partners in Cannon […]