Reply To: The ruling that changed everything (and nothing at all)

#48397
Avatar
John P.

“This case is one of the first this Court has taken to address the relationship between the First Amendment and the modern Internet. As a result, the Court must exercise extreme caution before suggesting that the First Amendment provides scant protection for access to vast networks in that medium.”

Justice Kennedy, Majority Ruling Opinion, Packingham v. North Carolina, page 6

“Of importane, the troubling fact that the law imposes severe restrictions on persons who already have served their sentence and are no longer subject to the supervision of the criminal justice system is also not an issue before the Court)”

Justice Kennedy, Majority Ruling Opinion, Packingham v. North Carolina, page 8

Great comments. Packingham is new ground and yet merely applies ancient principles of fairness to SO law. That and a subway token will get you a ride. Chuck is absolutely right there are no lawyers willing to fight to apply Packingham so to WC’s question, the state and her agents can do whatever the heck they want to do because there is no one on the other side to push back. Public opinion is, as always, against us and no judge wants to be the one who outlaws the registry or major aspects of it and/or probation. Yet, SCOTUS has spoken and if you were to win the lottery you would likely win significant freedoms if you sued. That being said, are we even allowed to play the lottery? Probably not…