3 ms·
> even if congress were to pass a law banning such gatherings, there would be first amendment implications Isn't there an obvious compelling state interest?
by AlexCoventry 7y ago
> even if congress were to pass a law banning such gatherings, there would be first amendment implications
Isn't there an obvious compelling state interest?
- koenigdavidmj 7y agoThe hurdle would then be that it’s the feds’ responsibility to prove that this is the smallest infringement that would accomplish the government’s intention.
- snickerbockers 7y agoThere's always a "compelling state interest" when it comes to violating the bill of rights.
- istjohn 7y agoCounter-example: "You may not print that--the President doesn't like dad jokes."
- will4274 7y agoStrict scrutiny requires not only a compelling state interest but that the restriction be narrowly tailored and the least restrictive means that satisfies the purpose. See: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_scrutiny https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_scrutiny .