Defending People

the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering

Encouraging Words from an Unlikely Source

Pho­tog­ra­phy has been rec­og­nized as a form of expres­sion pro­tected by the First Amend­ment. While con­ced­ing that, the court of appeals nev­er­the­less con­cluded that the statute “reg­u­lates a person’s intent in cre­at­ing a visual record and not the con­tents of the record itself.”

But that con­clu­sion does not nec­es­sar­ily exempt the statute from the First Amendment’s pro­tec­tions. The Supreme Court has rec­og­nized that the First Amend­ment includes, as a com­po­nent of free­dom of expres­sion, the pro­tec­tion of “free­dom of thought,”5 includ­ing the free­dom to think sex­ual thoughts. It is not enough to say that the statute is directed only at intent, if the intent con­sists of thought that is pro­tected by the First Amendment.

Keller, P.J., 28 March 2012, dis­sent­ing from refusal to grant appellant’s peti­tion for dis­cre­tionary review in Ex Part Nyabwa, Nos. PD-0073, 0074, 0075–12, cit­ing Stan­ley v. Geor­gia, 394 U.S. 557 (1969).

Share

About The Author

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.

Comments

Leave a non-anonymous Reply