It's a communist lawyer from ACORN, only this one sneaks cigarettes while forcing new taxes on anyone who drinks soda.
Posted on 09/28/2009 5:47:28 PM PDT by GVnana
The courts should vindicate the First Amendment rights of the reporters and media outlets involved in breaking the ACORN scandal wide open. And they should strike down the oppressive and absurd Maryland law that makes it a crime to record someone’s conversation without their knowledge.
-snip-
Maryland has a shockingly-broad law that makes it a crime—a felony, if fact—to record someone’s conversation without their knowledge. It then makes it a separate crime to disclose that conversation to a third party if the person disclosing knew or had reason to know that the conversation was illegally recorded.
Although the Baltimore prosecutor hasn’t filed charges, ACORN and the two workers caught on tape advising the reporters on how to carry out the underage sexual exploitation scheme have had the audacity to sue the reporters and Breitbart.com. They can do this because § 10–410 of the same Maryland wiretapping law also gives private parties the right to personally sue those who record or disclose such conversations.
-snip-
This Maryland statute is insane. But it’s not only ridiculous, it could also be unconstitutional as applied to these defendants.
-snip-
The Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment confers special protections. One of these is the overbreadth doctrine: A law targeting certain types of speech violates the First Amendment if it also burdens a substantial amount of speech that should be constitutionally protected. The court declares the law “overbroad,” and then strikes it down.
-snip-
So the defendants here should make sure their legal team includes experts in First Amendment law, and immediately raise a First Amendment defense. Having raised a federal issue, they should then remove this case from Maryland state court to the federal district court in Maryland.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
The Constitution? Pfffff what’s that pesky thing got to do with anything? It’s standin’ in the way of real hope and change. /sarc
Wouldn’t James and Hannah’s case fall under the whistle-blower’s protection laws?
It's a communist lawyer from ACORN, only this one sneaks cigarettes while forcing new taxes on anyone who drinks soda.
As someone pinged me on that earlier thread, the Rats are deserting the sinking ship.
I don’t think so. Whistleblowers must be a part of the organization they are exposing.
Is it constitutional to enforce it selectively for partisan effect? I can’t believe that this is the first time a reporter pulled this in Md.
So you can't blow the whistle from the outside?
Isn't blowing the whistle....blowing the whistle, no matter where you blow it from?
On another thread, somebody mentioned that the ACORN workers weren’t acting in the capacity of “private parties,” but employees of a business organization.
The State of Maryland isn’t touching this one. ACORN and the two workers filed a civil suit.
What if....
What if there was a dirty cop who was harassing you. You decide to secretly record his activities and make them public. You are not part of the police department but might be considered a "whistle-blower".
Now, what if ACORN was acting as an agent of the government, taking government money, working out of a government subsidized office space, giving out advice on how to work with (or around) the government - housing, tax advice, employment advice, etc.? You figure out they are dirty and secretly tape them. You are not part of ACORN,but are you acting to blow a whistle?
Is there a difference?
ACORN is nuts. Do they realize that this suit gives the reporters the ability to subpoena documents from ACORN and to put the employees and officers of ACORN under oath in depositions?
We have the same law here in IL - and it’s never going to change, because:
1) It protects elected officials from citizens recording their behavior.
2) It protects their businesses contributors from citizens recording their behavior.
Illinois has a very similar law that broadly forbids recording conversations without consent.
A summary can be found here.
http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states/illinois.html
Legally, yes. There is a difference. Whistleblower laws pertain to EMPLOYEES. See http://whistleblowerlaws.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=141&Itemid=54
That must be why Daniel Ellsberg got off scot-free after revealing classified information to the New York Times.
The Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment confers special protections. One of these is the overbreadth doctrine: A law targeting certain types of speech violates the First Amendment if it also burdens a substantial amount of speech that should be constitutionally protected. The court declares the law “overbroad,” and then strikes it down.
There are far fewer Free Press Clause cases, but generally the courts extend and apply free speech doctrines to cover the media as well. If anything, the media has additional protection, as it exists to inform “We the People” and enables “We the People” aka us to hold government accountable, as well as private entities.
Soooooo if you have a dirty cop and expose him, or you find a government agency (or agent of the government) doing something wrong and secretly tape incriminating evidence....while it might not be considered “whistle-blower” in the legal definition, we shouldn’t expose it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.