From CNN: High court debates dog fighting videos
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court voiced deep free speech concerns Tuesday about a law designed to stop the sale and marketing of videos showing dog fights and other acts of animal cruelty. Selling depictions of animal cruelty like this amateur dogfighting video may be illegal under a 1999 statute.
The justices heard an hour of lively debate about the scope and intent of the decade-old statute that supporters say has done much to stop the spread of profiting from the torture and abuse of animals. But media groups and the National Rifle Association were among those who say the law is overly broad. [Read full story]
Seems like the law, which was written with good intentions at preventing cruelty, is unintentionally too far-reaching. It would even prevent news reports and documentaries. The Supreme Court needs to clarify the limits of the law without striking it down completely.
From FOX News: High Court Takes Up Case of Cross on Public Land
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court is taking up a long-running legal fight over a cross honoring World War I soldiers that has stood for 75 years on public land in a remote part of California.
The cross, on an outcrop known as Sunrise Rock in the Mojave National Preserve, has been covered in plywood for the past several years following federal court rulings that it violates the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment prohibition against government endorsement of religion.
The justices were to hear arguments Wednesday in a case the court could use to make an important statement about its view of the separation of church and state. The Obama administration is defending the presence of the cross, which court papers describe as being 5 to 8 feet tall. [Read full story]
The 9th Circuit Court is the one that caused this trouble. It's historical and could set extreme precedent if not overturned. Also, how many times has the Supreme Court ruled ALREADY on cases like this one? And always in favor of letting the symbol remain! The 9th Circuit Court is just wasting our tax dollars by ignoring established precedent.
No comments:
Post a Comment