Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Plaintiffs' Brief in AETA Challenge

Plaintiffs' Brief in AETA Challenge

Ratings: (0)|Views: 42 |Likes:
Published by matthewstrugar
The plaintiffs' brief in the federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act.
The plaintiffs' brief in the federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act.

More info:

Published by: matthewstrugar on Apr 06, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

01/22/2013

pdf

text

original

 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
____________________________________)SARAHJANE BLUM, et al., )) Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-12229-JLTPlaintiffs, )) Leave to File Excess Pages Grantedv. ) on 4/5/12)ERIC HOLDER, in his official capacity as ) Oral Argument Set for May 14, 2012Attorney General of the United States ) (By Order of the Court on 3/7/12)of America, ))Defendant. )____________________________________)
MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DEFEDANT’S MOTIONTO DISMISS PURSUANT TO RULES 12(b)(1) AND 12(b)(6)
Case 1:11-cv-12229-JLT Document 26 Filed 04/06/12 Page 1 of 49
 
i
Table of Contents
Table of Authorities ......................................................................................................................... iiINTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1ARGUMENT ................................................................................................................................... 2I.
 
Plaintiffs’ Complaint May Not Be Dismissed onStanding or Ripeness Grounds ..................................................................................... 2II.
 
Plaintiffs Adequately State Claims forViolations of the First Amendment ............................................................................ 12A.
 
AETA is Substantially Overbroad ....................................................................... 121.
 
By Its Terms, AETA CriminalizesPlaintiffs’ Proposed Speech .................................................................... 142.
 
None of the “Saving” Provisions of AETASupport the Government ......................................................................... 21B.
 
AETA is Void for Vagueness .............................................................................. 23C.
 
AETA Impermissibly Discriminates Based onContent and Viewpoint ........................................................................................ 32CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................. 39
Case 1:11-cv-12229-JLT Document 26 Filed 04/06/12 Page 2 of 49
 
ii
Table of AuthoritiesC
ASES
 
 Ackerley Commc’ns v. City of Cambridge
,88 F.3d 33 (1st Cir. 1996) ..................................................................................................35
 AIDS Action Comm. v. MBTA
, 42 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1994) ..................................................33
 Am. Booksellers Found. for Free Expression v. Coakley
,No. 10-11165, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114750 (D. Mass. Oct. 26, 2010) ........................23
 Am. Life League v. Reno
, 47 F.3d 642 (4th Cir. 1995) ................................................ 37-38
 Am. Life League v. United States
, 855 F. Supp. 137 (E.D. Va. 1994) .................................5
 Arevalo v. Ashcroft 
, 344 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2003) .................................................................25
 Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition
, 535 U.S. 234 (2002) ..................................................13
 Ashcroft v. Iqbal
, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) ..............................................................................12
 Auburn Police Union v. Carpenter 
, 8 F.3d 886 (1st Cir. 1993) .................................. 22-23
 Babbit v. United Farm Workers Nat’l Union
, 442 U.S. 289 (1970) ....................................2
 Bell Atlantic v. Twombly
, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) .................................................................12
 Boos v. Barry
, 485 U.S. 312 (1988) ...................................................................................34
 Broadrick v. Oklahoma
, 413 U.S. 601 (1973) ...................................................................12
Cameron v. Johnson
, 390 U.S. 611 (1968) ........................................................................26
Caribbean Int’l News Corp. v. Agostini
,12 F. Supp. 2d 206 (D.P.R. 1998) .................................................................................... 6-7
CISPES v. FBI 
, 770 F.2d 468 (5th Cir. 1985).................................................................. 4-5
City Council v. Taxpayers for Vincent 
, 466 U.S. 789 (1984) ................................ 12-13, 23
City of Houston v. Hill
, 482 U.S. 451 (1987) ..............................................................13, 24
 Debs v. United States
, 249 U.S. 211 (1919) ................................................................16 n.8
 Diamond v. Charles
, 476 U.S. 54 (1986) ............................................................................2
Case 1:11-cv-12229-JLT Document 26 Filed 04/06/12 Page 3 of 49

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->