repeter
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 3,445
- Reaction score
- 682
- Location
- California
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Wichita Judge fails to issue Preliminary Injunction against Anti-Abortion Activist
I think that Judge is a total idiot; that statement was the absolute definition of a true threat.
Speech that has minimal social value, communicates serious intent to harm another individual, and causes the listener/reader to fear imminent injury is considered a true threat.
With that being the Supreme Court's definition of a true threat, from Watts v. U.S. and Virginia v. Black, does anyone have the audacity to tell me that this speech is protected speech under the first amendment?
In her letter to Dr. Means, Dillard wrote among other things: "You will be checking under your car everyday - because maybe today is the day someone places an explosive under it." Later in the letter, Dillard added: "We will not let this abomination continue without doing everything we can to stop it."
Although Judge Marten said that Dillard clearly intended to intimidate Dr. Means, he did not believe the letter constituted a "true threat" prohibited under FACE.
I think that Judge is a total idiot; that statement was the absolute definition of a true threat.
Speech that has minimal social value, communicates serious intent to harm another individual, and causes the listener/reader to fear imminent injury is considered a true threat.
With that being the Supreme Court's definition of a true threat, from Watts v. U.S. and Virginia v. Black, does anyone have the audacity to tell me that this speech is protected speech under the first amendment?