Supreme Court Rejects Ban on Animal Cruelty Videos
Domain grabbed in anticipation of summer confirmation battle.

Sponsorships:

Vote metrics:

rating total votes favorites comments
(4.13) 100 11 18

View metrics:

today yesterday this week this month all time
1 0 0 0 2,654

Inbound links:

views url
1 http://bit.ly/b68cxE
1 http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=AuG_od0REiPz1HWes4aIjIabvZx4?fr=yfp-t-701-s&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF8&p=supreme%20court%20animal%20cruelty
1 http://twitter.com/YTMNDBOT
1 http://www.us-asec.com/
1 http://www.coldfront.net/pjirc/chat.htm

Add a comment

Please login or register to comment.
April 27th, 2010
(3)
Love the biased media headline that doesn't read "Supreme Court reafirms free speech rights" Because under the law struck down, it wasn't just dog fighting videos that were covered. Hunting, and even instructional slaughterhouse videos would have been banned. How many more animals would have suffered because someone would fail to get the proper training? You also Nuke only Roberts, when the vote was 8-1.
April 27th, 2010
(4)
At least now I should be able to watch the Iraq puppy toss video again.
April 27th, 2010
(2)
Afghanistan puppy toss.
April 30th, 2010
(2)
The Supreme Court figured that people would lack the common fucking sense to know what is animal cruelty or not and would use the law to piss and shit all over everything, so they went ahead and threw the whole thing away. For once, they are correct.
April 27th, 2010
(2)
Scalia should of recused himself because I’m sure he’s killed many cute harmless animals.
April 27th, 2010
(3)
BARBARIC
April 27th, 2010
(2)
heavy petting
April 27th, 2010
(3)
Happy cat typically moves faster.
April 27th, 2010
(3)
I have all four versions of We Interrupt This Program in my library.
April 27th, 2010
(1)
NESCOTUS
April 28th, 2010
(5)
The case was dealing with a law banning those videos. So I think the headline is fair. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of the grey lady. I agree that the law was too broad and needed to be struck down.
I however no longer believe in the validity of the supreme court as impartial arbitrators of the Constitution due to its recent activist rulings that defy constitutional intent theory and legal precedent. Are rule of law is fading and will only continue to due to the public being distracted by the empty rhetoric of partisans.
April 30th, 2010
(4)
well actually, you forgot poland
May 1st, 2010
(3)
The constitution has been dead since the enactment of the patriot act
April 30th, 2010
(0)
I thought it was "Not Enough" not "Not Even." Triple negative FTW.
April 30th, 2010
(1)
Thank goodness, for a second I thought Sotomayer was actually in the Supreme Court.
May 1st, 2010
(0)
explosion.gif
May 1st, 2010
(0)
is win i could give this a 10
May 3rd, 2010
(0)
Would have been a 5 if Thomas or Scalia had been blown up