It has been 25 years since the Supreme Court decided that a category of
speech -- child pornography -- was so unredeeming that it did not merit
the protection of the First Amendment. Justices gave no indication
Tuesday that they were ready to add another.
In an oral argument on animal cruelty that touched on bullfighting,
cockfighting, fattening geese to make pate de foie gras and even a
hypothetical "human sacrifice channel," the court searched for the
limits of the Constitution's guarantee of free speech. The justices
indicated that Congress had gone too far in its attempt to protect
animals from abuse.
Join us on our
Share this page with your friends
on your favorite social network: