>The strongest argument in favor of the Constitutionality of these laws is that they are outlawing speech that could not have been made but for the violation of

>The strongest argument in favor of the Constitutionality of these laws is that they are outlawing speech that could not have been made but for the violation of another law What is the precedent of this argument? I'm guessing it can be found in the justification behind certain laws which make certain speech illegal.