You see, the
What
the hell?! That’s how I spend most of my
professional and free time!
They
do try to qualify their anti-speech statute by permitting such speech if, in
their minds, it is for a “legitimate purpose.”
But fortunately for me—and for every American who values the write (and
right) to free speech—their ridiculous law is probably unconstitutional. Because my Con Law prof essentially skipped
the first amendment, I’ll defer to Popehat:
I
think your ordinance is clearly, obviously, patently, inarguably
unconstitutional, because it prohibits a wide variety of speech protected by
the First Amendment, all based on the vague, lonely clause "which serves
no legitimate purpose." That clause is apparently one that you people
in Wisconsin think is some sort
of magic "go away First Amendment!" mantra. But it's not. Used
as you've used it, it leaves people to guess at what conduct is legal or
illegal, thus violating due process as well as freedom of expression. Courts
have upheld the "no legitimate purpose" clause only when it is
attached to statutes that are far more specific about the conduct prohibited,
and where the conduct prohibited is already outside the protection of the First
Amendment.
But
what does Poephat think of our government agents of Vernon County?
[M]y
purpose is to question whether officious officials like you serve any
legitimate purpose whatsoever in society, or whether you simply waste taxpayer
money and generate high-grade nuisance. Moreover, by measures like this, you
continue to advance the transformation of our society into a collection of
whiners and misfits who run to an incompetent government over every slight, no
matter how ridiculous.
I
like the way the Popehat operates.
No comments:
Post a Comment