home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky misc.legal:23004 alt.censorship:10051 alt.society.civil-liberty:7463 alt.politics.usa.constitution:1515
- Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.censorship,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.politics.usa.constitution
- Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!eff!mnemonic
- From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
- Subject: Re: Shouting "Movie!" at a Fire Station (Schenck v US)
- Message-ID: <1993Jan21.113050.24209@eff.org>
- Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
- Sender: usenet@eff.org (NNTP News Poster)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: eff.org
- Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
- References: <1993Jan20.055956.29638@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> <1993Jan20.143807.4762@eff.org> <1993Jan21.035728.25466@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>
- Distribution: usa
- Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 11:30:50 GMT
- Lines: 30
-
- In article <1993Jan21.035728.25466@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:
- >In article <1993Jan20.143807.4762@eff.org> mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:
- >>>Actually, I was thinking of NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel, and the
- >>>effects, not the phrasing of the ruling.
- >
- >>And yet the reasoning of the decision lies in its phrasing, not its
- >>effects.
- >
- >I'm assuming the Justices were rational enough to consider the effects
- >of the ruling.
-
- Wait a minute--you're saying you want the judges to anticipate the effects
- of their interpretation of the law and use that in the decision, rather
- than simply trying to interpret the law itself and deciding the case
- accordingly?
-
- That is just the kind of result-oriented judicial activism that people
- like you condemn.
-
-
- --Mike
-
-
-
-
- --
- Mike Godwin, |"I'm waiting for the one-man revolution
- mnemonic@eff.org| The only one that's coming."
- (617) 864-0665 |
- EFF, Cambridge | --Robert Frost
-