Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Court SD Cal. Upholds Ban on Photographing Border Checkpoint. Volokh Conspiracy

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin

    Court SD Cal. Upholds Ban on Photographing Border Checkpoint. Volokh Conspiracy

    "Lower courts have recently been holding that the First Amendment protects people’s right to audiorecord and videorecord in many public places, especially when they are recording the conduct of government officials. (See, e.g., ACLU v. Alvarez (7th Cir. 2012) and Glik v. Cunniffe (1st Cir. 2011).) This makes a good deal of sense; just as restricting the spending of money for speech interferes with the ability to speak, and is thus presumptively unconstitutional, so restricting audiorecording and videorecording events in public interferes with the ability to effectively and persuasively speak about those events.

    At the same time, this opens up a bunch of questions about what limits, if any, there are on this right. (For instance, many states have laws barring one party to a conversation from secretly recording that conversation, at least in many circumstances, yet that too burdens people’s ability to gather information.) Here is one court decision from a few days ago, Askins v. U.S. Dept. of Homeland Sec. (S.D. Cal. Sept. 20, 2003), upholding such a limitation. I’m not sure what the right analysis is here, but I thought the court’s discussion was worth passing along: [ ... ]" [Link URL in the original.]

    "The court does hold that plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment claim for the seizure of the photographs can nonetheless go forward, though the court’s reasoning on that is not clear to me."
    .............>>> A Normie's Guide to the Alt-Right <<<.............
    Following condemnations by Hillary Clinton, everyone in the world is now trying to define exactly what the Alt-Right is. Most of them are getting it wrong.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    The court and this judge apparently is suffering from some brain disorder.

    I cant make any sense of this ruling but higher courts will soon sort these issues out.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts