Greenguy's Board - View Single Post - The New 2257 Rulings

Bill · 2007-04-04, 04:22 PM

I looked at the FSC letters I've received from mar30th on, and haven't seen any mention of this. The .xxx thing, the copa thing, but not this.

Checking the website, this seems to be the summary:

=================

FSC attorneys have identified and are working on a number of strategies to address Judge Miller’s most recent decision. “While we are disappointed by Judge Miller’s ruling,” said Reed Lee, FSC Board member and President of the First Amendment Lawyers Association, “this case is far from over. There are a number of constitutional issues, previously appropriately avoided by Judge Miller that must now be addressed.”

=================

This is the whole announcement on their index page:

Judge Miller Issues Interim Decision on 2257

April 3, 2007 - On Friday March 30th, Colorado Federal District Court Judge Walker Miller issued an interim ruling dismissing some causes of action and allowing others to proceed in light of the Adam Walsh Act amendments to 18 U.S.C. § 2257 signed into law on July 27, 2006.

FSC attorneys, in cooperation with government litigators, had held off amending their lawsuit until the regulations for those amendments were issued. These regulations were scheduled to be issued in January, but have not yet been made public.

“It makes no sense to rule on a law prior to the issuance regulations defining how the law is to be carried out,” said Diane Duke, FSC Executive Director.

Judge Miller’s issuance is consistent with his December 2005 ruling enjoining parts of 2257. But, because of amendments made to 2257 by the Adam Walsh act, FSC has until April 16th to present to the court grounds for why the amended 2257 is unconstitutional and the government has until April 30th for response.

FSC attorneys have identified and are working on a number of strategies to address Judge Miller’s most recent decision. “While we are disappointed by Judge Miller’s ruling,” said Reed Lee, FSC Board member and President of the First Amendment Lawyers Association, “this case is far from over. There are a number of constitutional issues, previously appropriately avoided by Judge Miller that must now be addressed.”

“FSC will provide regular updates on the status of 2257 as the case unfolds through our weekly XPRESS newsletter, e-mail alerts and posting on our websites,” said Ms Duke. “As soon as we have additional information, we will communicate it to our membership.”

http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/

They have a 2257 Challenge legal fund - I'm going to ignore the fact that they don't have an online system for taking credit cards and call them up in a few minutes and give them $100 earmarked for the 2257 fund.

I hope many of you will do the same, contributing what you can. Giving the FSC money earmarked for 2257 defense is the best way to send them the message that this is what we want them to fight.

2007-04-04, 04:22 PM	#11
Bill Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip! Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,914	I looked at the FSC letters I've received from mar30th on, and haven't seen any mention of this. The .xxx thing, the copa thing, but not this. Checking the website, this seems to be the summary: ================= FSC attorneys have identified and are working on a number of strategies to address Judge Miller’s most recent decision. “While we are disappointed by Judge Miller’s ruling,” said Reed Lee, FSC Board member and President of the First Amendment Lawyers Association, “this case is far from over. There are a number of constitutional issues, previously appropriately avoided by Judge Miller that must now be addressed.” ================= This is the whole announcement on their index page: Judge Miller Issues Interim Decision on 2257 April 3, 2007 - On Friday March 30th, Colorado Federal District Court Judge Walker Miller issued an interim ruling dismissing some causes of action and allowing others to proceed in light of the Adam Walsh Act amendments to 18 U.S.C. § 2257 signed into law on July 27, 2006. FSC attorneys, in cooperation with government litigators, had held off amending their lawsuit until the regulations for those amendments were issued. These regulations were scheduled to be issued in January, but have not yet been made public. “It makes no sense to rule on a law prior to the issuance regulations defining how the law is to be carried out,” said Diane Duke, FSC Executive Director. Judge Miller’s issuance is consistent with his December 2005 ruling enjoining parts of 2257. But, because of amendments made to 2257 by the Adam Walsh act, FSC has until April 16th to present to the court grounds for why the amended 2257 is unconstitutional and the government has until April 30th for response. FSC attorneys have identified and are working on a number of strategies to address Judge Miller’s most recent decision. “While we are disappointed by Judge Miller’s ruling,” said Reed Lee, FSC Board member and President of the First Amendment Lawyers Association, “this case is far from over. There are a number of constitutional issues, previously appropriately avoided by Judge Miller that must now be addressed.” “FSC will provide regular updates on the status of 2257 as the case unfolds through our weekly XPRESS newsletter, e-mail alerts and posting on our websites,” said Ms Duke. “As soon as we have additional information, we will communicate it to our membership.” http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/ They have a 2257 Challenge legal fund - I'm going to ignore the fact that they don't have an online system for taking credit cards and call them up in a few minutes and give them $100 earmarked for the 2257 fund. I hope many of you will do the same, contributing what you can. Giving the FSC money earmarked for 2257 defense is the best way to send them the message that this is what we want them to fight.