3 ms·
The judge can rule that freedom of speech is not at issue. There are many well-settled instances in American case law where one's right to freedom of speech may
by mpyne 13y ago
The judge can rule that freedom of speech is not at issue. There are many well-settled instances in American case law where one's right to freedom of speech may be constrained (usually because it conflicts with the rights of others).
E.g. in this case the accusation is that Olson vandalized BoA for 6 months, causing the bank to have to continually pay to have the chalk cleaned off and risking further property damage.
Olson has a free speech right to protest, but that does not mean that he can unilaterally choose means that infringe on the rights of others.
You are right that foreclosing the issue may make great grounds for an appeal though, it's possible an appeal court could rule that the First Amendment is relevant and cause the case to be re-tried.
- trailcable 13y agoThe end was the only point I was making. The person may be guilty of infractions per law. To not even be able to reference his right to free speech, if it's upheld I'm quite worried.
- anigbrowl 13y agoYou can't raise a defense that isn't valid in law as part of a trial in the common law system. His lawyer knows this perfectly well.
- travisp 13y agoHis right to free speech does not change whether or not he committed the crime according to the law (unless the law specifically refers to the right to free speech), so it is a separate issue from what is argued at the initial trial. If his right to free speech is indeed being violated by applying the law, then modern legal practice does not consider this to be an issue for the jury itself to consider (it is considered in a separate manner, by the judge and by appeal).