Daily Archives: October 10, 2014

Twitter Sues Justice Dept., Says It Has First Amendment Right To Transparency
Twitter Sues Justice Dept., Says It Has First Amendment Right To Transparency.

By: NHJK1290121

Originally posted here:
Twitter Sues Justice Dept., Says It Has First Amendment Right To Transparency - Video

Consumer interest paramount in protecting Open Internet
Nebraska College of Law Prof Gus Hurwitz discusses consumer interest and First Amendment in FCC #39;s Open Internet Roundtable, 10.7.14.

By: Mike Wendy

Originally posted here:
Consumer interest paramount in protecting Open Internet - Video

First Amendment Song Mashup
via YouTube Capture.

By: Karissa Hair

See the original post here:
First Amendment Song Mashup - Video

Twitter VS Government - BREAKING NEWS
http://www.twitter.com/chefmarco305 MY ERIC GARNER VIDEO - http://youtu.be/VYa0vlw2mqY?list=UUWKBBPLvMxpkXNFXX3VoomA Twitter Sues the Government for Violating Its First Amendment Rights ...

By: chefmarco305

See the article here:
Twitter VS Government - BREAKING NEWS - Video

First Amendment test CCSU
This is the encounter that occurred after I filmed the officer stopping vehicles for what I thought was student id checks.

By: Cody DallaValle

Follow this link:
First Amendment test CCSU - Video

RICHLAND, Mich. (NEWSCHANNEL 3) - The former Gull Lake High School student, who reportedly posted a song with potentially threatening lyrics to YouTube will not face charges.

On Thursday, Kalamazoo County Undersheriff Paul Matyas said they won't be seeking charges against the teen.

He adds that no crime had been committed that they could determine.

Newschannel 3 sat down with an attorney to find out just how far your First Amendment rights will carry you.

Tuesday, Gull Lake Community Schools sent out a robo-call to parents, alerting them to a possible threat.

In that call, the Superintendent said a former student wrote a song that contained lyrics describing violence against the district.

That song was posted to YouTube, but has since been removed.

"In this case, if it didn't even get past step one, that tells me the Sheriff doesn't think it was a legitimate threat, and that might be because of who it's coming from, the circumstances that was made, and you know, when they look at...what the individual's actually capable of, they realize it was a totally empty threat," said attorney Don Smith, with Willis Law.

But how far is too far? And at what point is someone no longer protected under the First Amendment?

The Sheriff's Department will not say what those lryics were, but Smith says for authorities to pursue the case, it would have to be a specific threat that causes an imminent risk to people.

More here:
Attorney discusses first amendment rights in wake of alleged Gull Lake threat

Nude dancing is a form of constitutionally protected expression, but just barely. The U.S. Supreme Court has described it as only within the outer ambit of the First Amendments shield. Courts have upheld a slew of restrictions on strip clubs based on their possible secondary effects on a surrounding community, like blight, decreasing property values and increase in crime (especially prostitution).

But sometimes the strip clubs win. The First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday handed a rare victory to an adult entertainment company seeking to build a8,935-square-foot Adirondack style club in Mendon, Mass., a town of about6,000 people located about an hour southwest of Boston.

The Mendon Board of Selectman granted Showtime Entertainment LLC a license to build the strip club in 2010, on the condition that it abide by 18 pages of regulations and several newly amended zoning bylaws. Showtime could only build on four parcels in the town specifically carved out for adult entertainment. The company would have to confine the club to 2,000square feet; make it no taller than 14 feet; and open the clubs doors no earlier than 4:30 p.m. on school days. The town also banned alcohol in the club.

The justification for the rules: maintaining the rural aesthetics of Mendon as asmall town and avoiding traffic congestion.

Showtime sued, alleging that the zoning restrictions violated the First Amendment. A federal district judge sided with the town, ruling in 2012 that the regulations were narrowly tailored to serve the towns substantial government interest.

Showtime appealed, placing the case before the Boston-based First Circuit. The appeals court suggested that the towns justifications for the restrictions were pretense.

We see no cognizable difference in aesthetic impact between a large building hosting adult-entertainment activities and a large building hosting a bridge club or a bible study, Judge Juan Torruella wrote in theunanimous First Circuit decision.

The First Circuit also found insufficient evidence that the proposed club would impact traffic.

We believe that the record makes clear thatthese interests, although theoretically substantial in their ownright, are not what prompted Mendons amendments to the bylaws, JudgeTorruella wrote.

The ruling means that Showtime cant be held to the bylaws.

See more here:
Mass. Strip Club Dances Around Town Zoning Restrictions