Doe v. Prosecutor, Marion County, Indiana, Case No. 12-2512, 1/23/13; Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals decision A recent Indiana statute prohibits most registered sex offenders from using social networking websites, instant messaging services, and chat programs. John Doe, on behalf of a class of similarly situated sex offenders, challenges this law on First Amendment grounds… Read more
19. First Amendment
Indiana ban on sex offenders using social networking and social media sites violates First Amendment
State v. Bradley S. Johnson, Outagamie Co. Circ. Ct. No. 12CM495 circuit court decision; case activity Panhandling prosecution under § 947.02(4) is dismissed with prejudice because the vagrancy statute is unconstitutional under first amendment analysis: panhandling (“begging”) is a form of protected speech and its criminalization under § 947.02(4) is fatally vague and overbroad. State v. Starks, 51 Wis.2d 256… Read more
State v. Gary M. Hemmingway, 2012 WI App 133; case activity Stalking, § 940.32(2m)(a), which previously survived overbreadth and vagueness challenges based on rights to travel and equal protection, State v. Ruesch, 214 Wis. 2d 548, 571 N.W.2d 898 (Ct. App. 1997), now withstands a free-speech challenge: The statute isn’t a facially overbroad regulation of protected… Read more
United States v. Alvarez, USSC No. 11-210 (6/28/12), affirming 638 F.3d 666 (9th Cir. 2011). The Nation well knows that one of the costs of the First Amendment is that it protects the speech we detest as well as the speech we embrace. Though few might find respondent’s statements anything but contemptible, his right to… Read more
Questions Presented: California Civil Code sections 1746-1746.5 prohibit the sale of violent video games to minors under 18 where a reasonable person would find that the violent content appeals to a deviant or morbid interest of minors, is patently offensive to prevailing community standards as to what is suitable for minors, and causes the game… Read more
United States Supreme Court decision (or, here) Criminalizing depictions of animal cruelty, 18 U.S.C. §48, held “substantially overbroad,” therefore violative of First Amendment. First Amendment restrictions on speech are permitted “in a few limited areas” (obscenity, crime facilitation, et al.), and despite long-standing abhorrence of animal cruelty, depictions of same will not be added to… Read more
State v. Christopher J. Lesik, 2010 WI App 12, PFR filed For Lesik: Anthony Cotton Issue/Holding: Sexual assault (intercourse) of a child, § 948.02, isn’t unconstitutionally overbroad, against a theory that it criminalizes acts undertaken for “proper medical purpose.” Although the statute is silent with respect to medical conduct, potential overbreadth may be cured through judicial construction… Read more
State v. Christopher Baron, 2009 WI 58, affirming 2008 WI App 90 For Baron: Daniel P. Dunn Issue/Holding: The identity theft charge against Baron, sending emails from Fischer’s account without authorization and with intent to harm his reputation as a government official, survives strict scrutiny analysis under the First Amendment (freedom of speech clause): ¶45 To survive strict… Read more
