January 18, 2006

NOT LOCATION...:

War protester loses `restricted area' suit (Associated Press, January 18, 2006)

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected an appeal from an anti-war protester who was convicted of violating the boundaries of a "restricted area" established during President Bush's visit to South Carolina in 2002.

The right to free speech doesn't carry with it a right to speak wherever you want to.

Posted by Orrin Judd at January 18, 2006 4:34 PM
Comments

It's a 500 dollar fine and this idiot takes it all the way to the supreme court.

Well his little temper tantrum got him lots of attention, even by big serious men in real grown up suits and uniforms- like lawyers and police! I guess that was the point anyway.

Posted by: Amos at January 19, 2006 7:06 AM

It's a 500 dollar fine and this idiot takes it all the way to the supreme court.

Well, his little temper tantrum got him lots of attention, even from big, serious men in real grown up suits and uniforms- like lawyers and police! I guess that was the point anyway.

Posted by: Amos at January 19, 2006 7:07 AM

Nothing happened, Cert. den. The Supreme Court did nothing in a nothing case. The docket indicates that the respondent, i.e. the U.S. Attorney, filed a "Waiver of Response."

This is a non-event. A denial of certiorari is not the same thing as a decision on the merits of a case. Certiorari is denied in thousands of cases. We shall note it in citations to the lowwer court decision, but it really doesn't mean very much.

Posted by: Lou Gots at January 19, 2006 7:52 AM
« THAT'LL TEACH HER TO MESS WITH DENA DIETRICH: | Main | SOME PARTY »