2aHawaii
General Topics => Political Discussion => Topic started by: suka on January 12, 2016, 08:28:36 PM
-
Yesterday Jan 12 , 2016 the 9th Circuit ruled that parts of the Stolen Valors Act signed by Obama in 2013 is Unconstitutional.
Portions of the Stolen Valor Act are unconstitutional under the First Amendment, an 11-judge en banc panel of the
San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday reversed Elven Joe Swisher’s conviction for wearing the medals.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/12/stolen-valor-conviction-overturned-by-federal-appeals-court.html
-
Yesterday Jan 12 , 2016 the 9th Circuit ruled that parts of the Stolen Valors Act signed by Obama in 2013 is Unconstitutional.
Portions of the Stolen Valor Act are unconstitutional under the First Amendment standards, an 11-judge en banc panel of the
San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday reversed Elven Joe Swisher’s conviction for wearing the medals.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/12/stolen-valor-conviction-overturned-by-federal-appeals-court.html
saw that earlier, didn't get a chance to post
i don't have as much hope as before regarding peruta and baker now
how the hell does fraud become free speech?
-
United States v. Swisher, 11-35796
Three-Judge Panel Opinion: 771 F.3d 514 (9th Cir. 2014)
Order Taking Case En Banc: 785 F.3d 1365 (9th Cir. 2015)
Date of Order Taking Case En Banc: May 19, 2015
Status: Argued and submitted September 9, 2015, at 10:00 a.m., in San Francisco, California
Members of En Banc Court: Chief Judge Thomas, Judges Reinhardt, Kozinski, McKeown, Berzon, Clifton, Bybee, Ikuta, N.R. Smith, Nguyen and Watford
Subject Matter: Appeal from district court's denial of defendant's 28 U.S.C. 2255 motion challenging his conviction for wearing military medals without authorization in violation of 18 U.S.C. 704(a) (2002 ed.)
Holding: Jan 16, 2016
Peruta v. County of San Diego, 10-56971
Three-Judge Panel Opinions: 742 F.3d 1144 (9th Cir. 2014); 771 F.3d 570 (9th Cir. 2014)
Order Taking Case En Banc: 781 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2015)
Date of Order Taking Case En Banc: March 26, 2015
Status: Argued and submitted June 16, 2015, at 3:30 p.m., in San Francisco, California; consolidated with Richards v. Prieto, 11-16255
Members of En Banc Court: Chief Judge Thomas, Judges Pregerson, Silverman, Graber, McKeown, W. Fletcher, Paez, Callahan, Bea, N.R. Smith and Owens
Subject Matter: Appeal by County of San Diego residents challenging under the Second Amendment the County's policies for obtaining a license to carry a concealed weapon
Holding: Not yet decided
-
saw that earlier, didn't get a chance to post
i don't have as much hope as before regarding peruta and baker now
how the hell does fraud become free speech?
Much the opposite from you, I feel it would favor Peruta
But all the Judges are different from both cases besides Smith, Mckeown and Thomas
-
Much the opposite from you, I feel it would favor Peruta
how so, suka?
-
how so, suka?
It favors the Constitution , instead of a written Law passed by Congress and signed by a President.
-
Yeah I'd rather let constitution do it's job, especially because social media is so good at tracking down people and shaming them these days. Save money on enforcement and gain some free entertainment.
-
I know for a fact many of these scumbags wearing uniforms are doing it for the discounts businesses give, and of course, to panhandle as they pretend to be disabled vets.
-
And is an interesting case. It appears the Court said that you can't be punished for wearing metals falsely but you can be for using it to profit. I think the key part of all of this is that you count deceive people in order to benefit you financially. The same way there are laws that a retail establishment can't lie about a product they sell.