[108092] in Cypherpunks
ACLU Reacts to Verdict in Planned Parenthood Wanted Posters
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (FitugMix)
Thu Feb 4 09:17:06 1999
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 15:03:58 +0100 (MET)
From: FitugMix <tonne@thur.de>
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Reply-To: FitugMix <tonne@thur.de>
ACLU Reacts to Verdict in Planned Parenthood
"Wanted Posters" Case
Statement of David Fidanque
Executive Director, ACLU of Oregon
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, February 2, 1999
PORTLAND -- We view the jury's verdict as a clarion call to remove
violence and the threat of violence from the political debate over
abortion. Many Americans disagree about the wisdom and morality of
abortion. But violence and the threat of violence against providers of
abortion services should not be allowed to determine the outcome of that
debate.
The ACLU of Oregon believes that the safety of the physicians and clinic
workers who provide abortion services can be protected without
compromising the fundamental protections of free speech guaranteed by
the First Amendment. Our involvement as a friend of the court in this
case has been designed to help the court find the appropriate line
between protected and unprotected speech under our Constitution. We will
continue to play that role as this case moves forward.
The next task before the court will be to consider the plaintiffs'
request for a permanent injunction. We believe that any injunction
issued must be specific and narrowly tailored in order to comply with
constitutional protections of free speech while still preventing the
issuance of any new threats by these defendants.
Prior to trial, we argued that the Court should have adopted a stricter
constitutional standard in this case to distinguish between unlawful
threats and protected speech. We still believe the jury should have been
asked to determine whether the evidence showed that the defendants
intended to threaten these abortion providers.
The Court felt constrained by the current Ninth Circuit standard for
analyzing threats and directed the jury to determine whether a
reasonable person issuing the "wanted" posters in this case would have
known that those named in the posters would feel threatened. The
difference between the Ninth Circuit standard and the ACLU of Oregon's
position-that the defendants' intent to threaten the abortion providers
must also be proven-is a subtle, but important, distinction.
This decision will almost certainly be appealed to the Ninth Circuit,
and it may eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court. The standard which
is finally adopted in this case will apply in many future cases and must
be carefully drawn both to safeguard against any chilling effect on free
speech while still preventing the First Amendment from being used as a
shield by those who make true threats of violence. Assuming the verdict
is appealed, we will review the trial record closely prior to filing a
brief which addresses these issues in the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals.
Read the ACLU's amicus brief at http://www.aclu-or.org/aclu/ppbrief.htm
Read the ACLU's previous news release on the case at
http://www.aclu.org/news/1999/n011299b.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Mary had a crypto key,
she kept it in escrow,
and everything that Mary said,
the Feds were sure to know." -- Sam Simpson
...
"I guess that's how they were able to do it, in the way they did, without anyone knowing beforehand. If there still had been portable money, it would have been more difficult.
"It was after the catastrophe, when they shot the president and machine-gunned the Congress and the army declared a state of emergency. They blamed it on the Islamic fanatics, at the time.
"Keep calm, they said on television. Everything is under control."
...
"That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary. There wasn't even any rioting in the streets. People stayed home at night, watching television, looking for some direction. There wasn't even an enemy you could put your finger on."
- Offred, _The Handmaid's Tale_
ISBN 0-449-21260-2
#!/usr/local/bin/perl -0777-- -export-a-crypto-system-sig -RC4-3-lines-PERL
@k=unpack('C*',pack('H*',shift));for(@t=@s=0..255){$y=($k[$_%@k]+$s[$x=$_
]+$y)%256;&S}$x=$y=0;for(unpack('C*',<>)){$x++;$y=($s[$x%=256]+$y)%256;
&S;print pack(C,$_^=$s[($s[$x]+$s[$y])%256])}sub S{@s[$x,$y]=@s[$y,$x]}
