|
 |
|
|
“Courtside,” Communications Lawyer, Vol. 27, No. 2
July, 2010
Partners Paul M. Smith, Julie M. Carpenter, Katherine A. Fallow, Matthew S. Hellman and Associate Jessica R. Amunson discuss the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Stevens, a First Amendment case involving 18 U.S.C. § 48 which criminalizes the knowing creation, possession or sale of depictions of animal cruelty with the intent to secure commercial gain in this regular "Courtside" column in the July issue of Communications Lawyer. The Court struck down the law in an 8-1 ruling. The authors discuss the Court’s analysis of the arguments and conclude that “the Court’s decision no doubt disappointed some animal advocates, but it did not disappoint First Amendment advocates.” The article also discusses EMA v. Schwarzenegger, a case the Court decided to hear in the upcoming term which concerns a California law banning minors from purchasing or renting “violent video games.” The authors note that the law is “one in a series of similar laws enacted around the country during the past ten years” that all have been ruled “unconstitutional under the First Amendment.” The authors assert that the Court “recently refused to create a new category of unprotected speech in United States v. Stevens” and it remains to be seen whether “the Court will choose to expand the obscenity doctrine in the context of violent video games.” Mr. Smith, Ms. Fallow, Mr. Hellman and Partner Duane Pozza challenged the California law in the Ninth Circuit on behalf of the Entertainment Merchants Association and the Entertainment Software Association and will represent the associations before the Supreme Court in the upcoming term.
 Please click here to view the article.
Practice Groups:
Litigation Department
Appellate and Supreme Court Practice
ATTORNEY(S):
JESSICA RING AMUNSON, JULIE M. CARPENTER, KATHERINE A. FALLOW, MATTHEW S. HELLMAN, PAUL M. SMITH
|
|
Print This Page
