Back in 1999,
outraged by videos aimed at people who get a sexual thrill from
watching women stomp on little animals, Congress made it a felony
to create, sell, or possess with intent to distribute a "depiction
of animal cruelty." Senior Editor Jacob Sullum says the law,
which the Supreme Court will consider next week, defines
such depictions broadly enough to cover a lot of
constitutionally protected speech, while making an exception for
material with "serious religious, political, scientific,
educational, journalistic, historical, or artistic value." By
inviting jurors to be film critics, Sullum argues, Congress
has turned the First Amendment on its head.
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSS
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.
links of london Ring|10.22.09 @ 1:57AM|#
It was a very nice idea! Just wanna say thank you for the information you have shared. Just continue writing this kind of post. I will be your loyal reader. Thanks again.