3 ms·
Most of the time when you see a headline like this it's worth reading the actual judgement. They are publically available. http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir
by c0nfused 9y ago
Most of the time when you see a headline like this it's worth reading the actual judgement. They are publically available.
http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/17/07/163555P.pdf http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/17/07/163555P.pdf
- mseebach 9y agoThis seems to be mostly concerned with the rules for when someone should be recused? There seems to be no discussion of the right to record anyone anywhere, presumably that was covered in the previous, appealed/upheld judgement? Do you have a link to that?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- c0nfused 9y agoThis is the judgement in question. It has no bearing on free speech and should not be presented as doing so by anyone. If you can find a different case involving Akins on July 25th you are welcome to link to it instead. http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/opnByMM.pl?theMM=07&theYY=2017&A1=Get+Opinions http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/opnByMM.pl?theMM=07&th...
- leereeves 9y agoThis is the district court ruling: http://courtweb.pamd.uscourts.gov/courtwebsearch/mowd/BNJpmRPFlI.pdf http://courtweb.pamd.uscourts.gov/courtwebsearch/mowd/BNJpmR...
- calafrax 9y agothe judgement is actually pretty useless here since it just says they affirm the lower court ruling which was being appealed and doesn't include any reasoning on why.