Friday, March 16, 2018
Eleventh
Circuit: Wearing a mask in public is illegal in Georgia (with exceptions for
Halloween, among other things), a measure meant to protect against
"terrorization by masked vigilantes." So an allegedly peaceful protester
arrested for wearing a Guy Fawkes mask can't sue Atlanta police. Dissent: That's
not the law; wearing a mask in public is legal unless the wearer intends to
intimidate people; "non-threatening political mask wearing" doesn't meet that
standard.
there is a circuit split on anti-mask statutes. it is connected to McIntyre + anonymity. the 11th circuit has gotten this wrong 3 times so far.
dissent: The right to anonymously engage in protected speech, especially political speech, has been similarly upheld by the Supreme Court. See, e.g., Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60, 64 (1960) (upholding the right to anonymously engage in protected speech and noting that “[p]ersecuted groups and sects from time to time throughout history have been able to criticize oppressive practices and laws either anonymously or not at all.”); McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n, 514 U.S. 334, 343 (1995) (observing that although “[t]he specific holding in Talley related to advocacy of an economic boycott, [] the Court's reasoning embraced a respected tradition of anonymity in the advocacy of political causes.”). Indeed, the Miller court acknowledged this right in finding that engaging in non-threatening political mask-wearing was clearly protected conduct and not actionable under the Anti-Mask Act
there is a circuit split on anti-mask statutes. it is connected to McIntyre + anonymity. the 11th circuit has gotten this wrong 3 times so far.
dissent: The right to anonymously engage in protected speech, especially political speech, has been similarly upheld by the Supreme Court. See, e.g., Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60, 64 (1960) (upholding the right to anonymously engage in protected speech and noting that “[p]ersecuted groups and sects from time to time throughout history have been able to criticize oppressive practices and laws either anonymously or not at all.”); McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n, 514 U.S. 334, 343 (1995) (observing that although “[t]he specific holding in Talley related to advocacy of an economic boycott, [] the Court's reasoning embraced a respected tradition of anonymity in the advocacy of political causes.”). Indeed, the Miller court acknowledged this right in finding that engaging in non-threatening political mask-wearing was clearly protected conduct and not actionable under the Anti-Mask Act
Comments:
Post a Comment
