WASHINGTON — In a major and muscular First Amendment ruling, the Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down a federal law that made it a crime to create or sell dogfight videos and other depictions of animal cruelty. The Full Article (NYTIMES.com)
Allison Gill, NYLS SALDF Secretary
This is a terrible blow to the laws that help prevent cruelty to animals. This law basically placed a criminal statute on those selling or trafficking videos of dogfighting or other cruelty to animal videos. It was struck down under the first amendment, saying that the law was too broad, and would also allow for the prosecution of those who do not do anything illegal in making the film, such as hunting.
The government's arguments that this is akin to child pornography laws was rejected because Child Pornography laws are a 'special case' because the underlying market is 'intrinsically related to the abuse.' This has got to be one of the most absurd conclusions, as the videos are intrinsically related. For what purpose could a dog fighting or other animal cruelty video be used? I'm having a hard time coming up with any legitimate reasons that don't further abuse. The law also included several exceptions for religious, political, scientific, news, and other legitimate purposes that are protected by the first amendment, so the overly broad context is equally puzzling.
While it left open the possibility for congress to create a new, narrower law that would pass muster, it also allows for these videos to be legal for at least a little while. The problem is that these videos are now legal in the mean time, and animals are left worse off.
0 comments:
Post a Comment