ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Constitutional Law Blogs -> First Amendment Center

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Constitutional Law

: First Amendment Center

House votes for bill to stop animal 'crush videos'

By By The Associated Press

ADVERTISEMENTS

WASHINGTON ? The House voted yesterday to ban so-called crush videos that depict the abuse and killing of animals.

The measure would revive, with some modifications, a 1999 law that was struck down by the Supreme Court last April in United States v. Stevens on the grounds it was too broadly written and violated First Amendment free-speech protections.

Congress has been trying since then to come up with a more narrowly crafted law. The measure the House passed still differs slightly from a version approved by the Senate in September. It now goes back to the Senate.

"We need a law that stays on the books," House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., said in explaining the decision to tinker with the Senate language.

The bill, H.R. 5566, was the first to be taken up in the lame-duck session of Congress that opened yesterday.

The legislation, which the House originally passed in July, would make it a crime to sell or distribute videos that violate bans on animal cruelty by showing animals being burned, drowned, suffocated or impaled.

Such videos appeal to a sexual fetish by showing women, often barefoot or wearing high heels, stomping small animals to death.

Every state bans animal cruelty, but it has been difficult to apply those laws to crush videos because they often do not show faces, dates or locations. The legislation makes interstate sale of such videos a crime subject to fines and imprisonment.

Conyers said the House took out a Senate provision that made punishments for attempting or conspiring to make the videos equal to punishments for a completed product. He said that could cause constitutional issues.

Betsy Dribben, vice president for government relations at the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, expressed frustration at the delay. "We're concerned about the animals being killed and we're also concerned about the social ramifications," she said, citing opinions that cruelty to animals can be a catalyst to violence against humans.

Rep. Elton Gallegly, R-Calif., a sponsor of the original bill in 1999, said in a previous statement that famed killers such as Ted Bundy and Ted Kaczynski tortured or killed animals before killing people.

The legislation makes exceptions for films depicting hunting, trapping and fishing.

Full post as published by First Amendment Center on November 15, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0141 secs (new cache)