Anti-abortion site comments are 'true threat'
Summary
In its 6-5 decision, the 9th U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that comments posted on Web sites and anti-abortion "wanted" posters are not constitutionally protected speech under the First Amendment, but rather constitute a "true threat." The appeals court, however, sent the $108 million damages award back to a lower court for reconsideration.
The decision centered around the Freedom of Access to Clinics Entrances Act (FACE), a federal law that protects reproductive health services and its staff from violence or threats. A person who violates the law faces fines or imprisonment.
Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt, however, disagreed with the decision. In his dissent, he wrote that the majority's unwillingness to recognize the difference between political speech and private threats "is extremely troublesome." --Gwendolyn Mariano, Special to ZDNet News
Topics
In its 6-5 decision, the 9th U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that comments posted on Web sites and anti-abortion "wanted" posters are not constitutionally protected speech under the First Amendment, but rather constitute a "true threat." The appeals court, however, sent the $108 million damages award back to a lower court for reconsideration.
The decision centered around the Freedom of Access to Clinics Entrances Act (FACE), a federal law that protects reproductive health services and its staff from violence or threats. A person who violates the law faces fines or imprisonment.
Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt, however, disagreed with the decision. In his dissent, he wrote that the majority's unwillingness to recognize the difference between political speech and private threats "is extremely troublesome." --Gwendolyn Mariano, Special to ZDNet News
Talkback - Tell Us What You Think
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Facebook Activity
