Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Caging Animal Advocates' Political Freedoms: The Unconstitutionality Of The Animal And Ecological Terrorism Act, Andrew N. Ireland Moore Jan 2005

Caging Animal Advocates' Political Freedoms: The Unconstitutionality Of The Animal And Ecological Terrorism Act, Andrew N. Ireland Moore

Animal Law Review

The animal advocacy movement is facing another obstacle, resulting from the creation of the Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act (AETA). The Act seeks to create harsh penalties including a Terrorist Registry for acts performed by the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and ALF-type actors. In addition, the proposed legislation will affect animal advocates not involved with the ALF. However, the model legislation, as written, must pass Constitutional scrutiny. This paper argues that the proposed Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act is unconstitutional due to its infringement on the First Amendment, its overbreadth, and its vagueness.


Shoot First, Talk Later: Blowing Holes In Freedom Of Speech, Jacqueline Tresl Jan 2002

Shoot First, Talk Later: Blowing Holes In Freedom Of Speech, Jacqueline Tresl

Animal Law Review

Ms. Tresl examines the constitutionality of hunter harassment laws. When a five-step doctrinal analysis is applied to hunter harassment statutes, it is clear that the statutes are content-based and subject to the strictest of scrutiny. Because the statutes fail the strict scrutiny test, they therefore violate the American citizenry’s First Amendment right to free expression.


Where Do We Draw The Line Between Harassment And Free Speech?: An Analysis Of Hunter Harassment Law, Katherine Hessler Jan 1997

Where Do We Draw The Line Between Harassment And Free Speech?: An Analysis Of Hunter Harassment Law, Katherine Hessler

Animal Law Review

Ms. Hessler examines the constitutionality of the federal hunter harassment statute and concludes that protests of hunting events should be protected under the First Amendment.