Only if you ignore or strike down 52 U.S.C. § 30121(b)(2) AND 22 U.S.C. § 611(b)(2)-(3). @VolokhChttps://twitter.com/rickhasen/status/889512642758418432 …
-
Also bear in mind that the core issue is overbreadth of the definition of "thing of value," which appears elsewhere outside 30121.
that's a separate problem and if applied only to foreign governments, easy to say no *substantial* overbreadth
-
-
As a matter of statutory construction, rare for Court to define a term so broadly it's only Constitutional in a tiny sliver of its uses.
-
That's exactly the sort of thing the Court rejected in Stevens when applying overbreadth to a definitional section.
End of conversation
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.