Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Federal Judge strikes down ban on undercover investigative videos on First Amendment grounds [Darleen Click]

Oh wait, this is for Animal rights activists

A federal judge struck down Idaho’s ban on undercover videos at factory farms Monday, saying state legislators wrongly criminalized free speech to protect powerful agricultural groups.

Animal rights advocates called the ruling the first such defeat for a so-called ag-gag law in the U.S. The laws have gained popularity in some states as activists continue to publish undercover videos showing animal abuse at facilities around the country.

U.S. Chief Judge B. Lynn Winmill of the District of Idaho swept away the state’s ban on the grounds that the law violated the 1st Amendment and selectively targeted activists or journalists who might be critical of factory farm practices.

“The effect of the statute will be to suppress speech by undercover investigators and whistleblowers concerning topics of great public importance: the safety of the public food supply, the safety of agricultural workers, the treatment and health of farm animals, and the impact of business activities on the environment,” Winmill wrote in a summary judgment.

The judge said that “the facts show the state’s purpose in enacting the statute was to protect industrial animal agriculture by silencing its critics.”

But three years and three-hundred hours of investigative videos on what is being done to human babies?

A Planned Parenthood executive admits in an undercover video that her doctors alter abortion procedures and she manipulates prices to accommodate specific fetal tissue harvesting requests — including delivering fully intact fetuses — though doing so may violate federal law.

In the nearly 16-minute, edited video, the fifth released by Center for Medical Progress, a woman identified as Melissa Farrell, director of research for Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, discusses pricing for specimens — ranging from intact fetuses to tissue and organs — for outside tissue procurement companies.

“Yeah, and so if we alter our process, and we are able to obtain intact fetal cadavers, then we can make it part of the budget, that any dissections are this, and splitting the specimens into different shipments is this,” Farrell said. “I mean it’s all just a matter of line items.”

Whatever, h8rs. You just want to suppress the sexuality of teh womyns.

19 Replies to “Federal Judge strikes down ban on undercover investigative videos on First Amendment grounds [Darleen Click]”

  1. “But, mammograms!”

    Of which PP does zero percent. No rounding down, there. Liars, the lot of them.

  2. bgbear says:

    It is like the law is arbitrary or something.

  3. McGehee says:

    The rule of law? Yers. If you’re one.

  4. dicentra says:

    Almost like some people get more legal protection from others when they’re, you know, too big to fail.

    Also, about that 3% canard:

    The group performs about 330,000 abortions a year, or roughly 30 percent of all the abortions in the country. By its own accounting in its 2013-2014 annual report, it provides about as many abortions as Pap tests (380,000). The group does more breast exams and provides more breast-care services (490,000), but not by that much.

    The 3 percent figure is derived by counting abortion as just another service like much less consequential services.

    So abortion is considered a service no different than a pregnancy test (1.1 million), even though a box with two pregnancy tests can be procured from the local drugstore for less than $10.

    By Planned Parenthood’s math, a woman who gets an abortion but also a pregnancy test, an STD test and some contraceptives has received four services, and only 25 percent of them are abortion. This is a little like performing an abortion and giving a woman an aspirin, and saying only half of what you do is abortion.

    Such cracked reasoning could be used to obscure the purpose of any organization.

    The sponsors of the New York City Marathon could count each small cup of water they hand out (some 2 million cups, compared with 45,000 runners) and say they are mainly in the hydration business.

    Or Major League Baseball teams could say that they sell about 20 million hot dogs and play 2,430 games in a season, so baseball is only .012 percent of what they do.

    It’s as I suspected: the 3% is calculated by adding lots of fluff and chaff to the “procedure” count.

    I know: this is my surprised face, too.

  5. Benedick says:

    CA law is more restrictive on recording than Idaho. Federalism.

  6. McGehee says:

    I side with Texas. The removal of intact fetal cadavers suitable for Genocide, Inc.’s deli counter is a surgical procedure and shouldn’t be getting done among pallets and meat lockers like so much sausage-making.

  7. Darleen says:

    CA law is more restrictive on recording than Idaho. –

    Yet, strangely, the CA Attorney General never went after Compassion over Killing

  8. newrouter says:

    >CA law is more restrictive on recording than Idaho. Federalism<

    so all the ca surveillance cameras the state has installed are illegal?

  9. newrouter says:

    are police body cams illegal if the citizen is not informed?

  10. Ernst Schreiber says:

    No. But your surveillance camera footage of the cops ought to be an inadmissable invasion of their reasonable expectation of privacy if the cops think they’ve disabled it.

  11. Darleen says:

    Ernst

    They should ban public employee unions (idiocy only a police union would put forth)

    and I say that as a (forced) PE union member …

  12. happyfeet says:

    yes yes ban em all

    that would do more to help america than a thousand spa days

  13. Darleen says:

    grief

    I have no issue with private unions — 1A free association and all

    but a PE union shouldn’t exist and didn’t until JFK allowed ’em.

  14. happyfeet says:

    yes yes i was agreeing that we should ban all public employee unions or at least do on em like how Mr. Governor Scott Walker did

    he beat them savagely with his pimp hand to where they reflexively cower whenever they see him

    therapy dogs desperately needed

  15. bgbear says:

    Thanks dicentra, I assumed it was something like that. I was thinking that they were looking at all tasks and labor costs, including admin, and comparing to labor/hours devoted to abortion. The link demonstrates it is much like that.

  16. bgbear says:

    I think it is funny / ironic that public employees feel they need a union to protect themselves from exploitation by their employers, state and federal governments. The same state and federal government that the rest of us should not question and accept as working in our best interest.

  17. dicentra says:

    to protect themselves from exploitation by their employers, state and federal governments

    Everyone in the management structure in gubmint offices is in the union as well.

    They’re organized against the TAXPAYERS, who have no seat at the negotiating table. Our putative “representatives” have every incentive to give away the store (it’s not their money), so we’re eviscerated by the taxes that tear out of our hides and then again by the ineptly malicious “services” they provide.

    *spit*

  18. bgbear says:

    eek

  19. Public Sector Unions were formed by collusion between Politicians and those of their supporters who they gave jobs to in order to more efficiently steal tax monies from the Sovereign People.

Comments are closed.