Thursday, December 11, 2014
http://watchdogwire.com/nevada/2014/11/14/opinion-nevada-supreme-court-has-chance-to-uphold-free-speech/
I dont think this guy is 100% right, but I admire his passion.
I have found the case he's refering to.
http://www.campaignfreedom.org/litigation/current-litigation/citizen-outreach-v-miller/
I don't usually get involved in express advocacy arguments; they are a bit of a sideshow.
But the brief does an adequate job of showing that the flies were not express advocacy.
That's why the express advocacy test hasn't worked - there are too many false accusations that something is express when it isn't, that there is a chilling effect.
The columnist may be right that Citizen Outreach should have cited to the Nevada constitution as well.
http://www.npri.org/issues/publication/rip-publius-sos-miller-in-aggressive-assault-on-free-speech
says that Nevada has re-enacted the statute voided in ACLU v Heller.
http://www.npri.org/issues/publication/rip-publius-sos-miller-ag-masto-target-partys-opponents
he goes on to discuss the Citizens Outreach case.
My C and R keys are sticking so this entry may have more typos than usual.
I dont think this guy is 100% right, but I admire his passion.
I have found the case he's refering to.
http://www.campaignfreedom.org/litigation/current-litigation/citizen-outreach-v-miller/
I don't usually get involved in express advocacy arguments; they are a bit of a sideshow.
But the brief does an adequate job of showing that the flies were not express advocacy.
That's why the express advocacy test hasn't worked - there are too many false accusations that something is express when it isn't, that there is a chilling effect.
The columnist may be right that Citizen Outreach should have cited to the Nevada constitution as well.
http://www.npri.org/issues/publication/rip-publius-sos-miller-in-aggressive-assault-on-free-speech
says that Nevada has re-enacted the statute voided in ACLU v Heller.
During both the 2009 and 2011 Nevada Legislatures, for example, Miller aggressively pushed through legislation that would entirely ignore the McIntyre and ACLU v. Heller precedents, although neither has ever been reversed. In 2011, his key anti-free-speech provisions becameNevada law. Today, the same rule that the Ninth Circuit vacated in 2004 is essentially back, asNRS 294A.348.
However, I'm not sure that legislation overs disclaimers, maybe just disclosure.
he goes on to discuss the Citizens Outreach case.
My C and R keys are sticking so this entry may have more typos than usual.
Comments:
Post a Comment
