Note: State law and state free speech guarantees are involved in the Massachusetts case, so it cannot be appealed to SCOTUS.
-
-
-
Key analysis from the Mass court applies Alvarez (Stolen Valor Act case) logic to campaign statements case:pic.twitter.com/QlreRt4PMx
-
And, rather brutally, compares the Mass false statements law to the Sedition Act.
#yikespic.twitter.com/a33IHThHhw
-
And, there was some talk of McIntyre, the anonymous leafleting SCOTUS case:pic.twitter.com/YeQcl19dpu
-
Distinguishing between fact & opinion is tough, court says, & — even when certain it's fact — distinguishing between true & false is tough.
-
And, in the context of the timeline of an election, that's "all the more concerning," the Mass high court holds.
-
.
@chrisgeidner specifically, says "efforts...to thwart political corruption, voter intimidation, and election fraud" a compelling interest. -
@SpauldingCC Right, but, come up with a narrow tailoring that the court would be comfortable with.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.