CCCToad on 8/11/2010 at 03:30
Quote Posted by demagogue
Well, I can't resist giving a lawyer's perspective on this.
Then what's interesting about this case is you see how for a lot of cases the conservative and liberal justices actually share most of their thinking. A lot of cases will get a unanimous or near vote. There's this perception that they're always at each others' throats and can't agree on anything and split every vote, but that's just a few cases. Here both sides are pretty much on the side of free speech and worrying a lot about the law's vagueness and inconsistency.
True, but as I understand it the reason for that perception is that its usually the most controversial cases that get public attention. And those cases are usually both divisive ideologically, and lack clear judicial precedent.
That said, this case was pretty clear cut, and its hard to disagree with the result. The problem with censorship is that even if the initial case makes sense, subsequent decisions to censor are not guaranteed to make any sense.
For example, this was banned in Germany:
Inline Image:
http://robertlbryant.com/gaming/carts/2600_riverraid.jpg