Posted on 05/16/2002 1:26:15 PM PDT by gdani
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:40:18 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
A federal appeals court reversed course Thursday and ruled that anti-abortion activists who created Wild West-style posters and a Web site condemning abortion doctors can be held liable because their works amounted to illegal threats, not free speech.
However, the sharply divided 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a lower-court judge to reduce the $107 million in damages a Portland, Ore., jury awarded to four doctors who sued a dozen of the abortion foes.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Sorry, the last surviving reasonable person died of old age in 1986.
Majority
Rymer - Bush
Schroedor - Carter
Hawkins - Clinton
Silverman - Clinton
Wardlaw - Clinton
Rawlinson - Clinton
Dissent
Reinhardt - Carter
Kozinski - Reagan
Kleinfeld - Bush
Belzon - Clinton
O'Scannlan - Reagan
Neglecting to mention that (1) No killer has been convicted in the Slepian case; (2) History shows that it is much more likely that an abortionist will get struck by lightning than 'executed'.
You mean there's been TWO Bushes as prez? My world's gone topsy-turvy
(Senior)
I would like someone to explain to me why the website is relevant at all, since the proprietor of the website is not a defendant in the case. The pro-aborts are drifting from merely evil to blatantly insane; they're now prosecuting pro-lifers for "crimes" allegedly committed by other pro-lifers.
See what I mean? You can now be prosecuted under federal law if people who agree with you commit violent acts. If that doesn't constitute prior restraint on free speech, I don't know what does.
I did spend some time looking over the site. No, I don't believe there was expressed support for violence against abortion doctors.
Is violence against providers an appropriate tactic, you ask? Considering who might be reading this thread, if I did believe violence was (is) an appropriate tactic I certainly wouldn't say so here. Talk about asking for a knock on your door . . .!
I guess it depends on how you look at it.
One thing I do know: Neil Horsely, the owner of the Nuremberg Files, was a confidant of Mark Waagner, the cretin arrested for the phony anthrax letters to abortion clinics last year. Horsely is a strange character who spent his five minutes on The Big Story with John Gibson last year yelling at Gibson because he didn't spend every show condemning abortion.
I agree with you. I do feel, though, that outlawing abortion all together would solve this problem.
Considering the topic, shouldn't this list come with addresses?
A long time ago, law dealt with facts and acts. Now, we are in a world where thoughts, feelings and attitudes are legislated.
1984 has finally arrived. ThoughtCrime is now considered in the judical proceedings of our highest courts.
As to question 2: Violence is the American Way, n'est pas? But, somehow, the prolife side is now forced to uniquely carry this albatross, along with drug thugs. I saw it on TV. It must be real.
Do an analysis of all the incidents of real violence committed by misguided prolifers against 47,000,000 dead babies.
It is. There have been occasions where a SCOTUS justice stays available so that as soon as the 9th circuit makes a ruling he can issue a stay. (This is for cases where the circuit is blocking an execution at the last minute, the SCOTUS justice stays the circuit's order, and the execution proceeds)
Yes to the first question and no to the second.
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.