Post by AustinHoya03 on Jun 27, 2011 23:35:42 GMT -5
www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/08-1448.pdf
Interesting stuff from the court this week (and over the past year) regarding First Amendment issues. Potential points for discussion:
Justice Alito has indicated that he believes that "crush videos," protests at soldiers' funerals, and violent video games constitute speech which may be prohibited or regulated. To varying degrees, and with notable exceptions, the rest of the Court has mostly indicated that such speech, while disgusting, is protected by the First Amendment.
Justice Breyer, dissenting in the Court's opinion striking down California's violent video game regulations, states that it doesn't make much sense to allow states to prohibit children from buying pornography, yet to prohibit states from regulating children's consumption of violent video games.
Next up: the Court considers a challenge to the FCC's indecency policy. Predictions?
Interesting stuff from the court this week (and over the past year) regarding First Amendment issues. Potential points for discussion:
Justice Alito has indicated that he believes that "crush videos," protests at soldiers' funerals, and violent video games constitute speech which may be prohibited or regulated. To varying degrees, and with notable exceptions, the rest of the Court has mostly indicated that such speech, while disgusting, is protected by the First Amendment.
Justice Breyer, dissenting in the Court's opinion striking down California's violent video game regulations, states that it doesn't make much sense to allow states to prohibit children from buying pornography, yet to prohibit states from regulating children's consumption of violent video games.
Next up: the Court considers a challenge to the FCC's indecency policy. Predictions?
