Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mikesouth
Now here is what I don't get. Why isn't the FSC challenging 2257 on grounds that would protect all of us from Congress, who has passed this law with the sole intent of shifting the burden of proof mentioned above. 2257 allows the feds to prosecute and convict a pornographer whose ONLY crime is not being able to prove he didn't commit a crime, and for those of you who attended public schools this is ass backwards from our long standing legal premise that the burden of proof is on the prosecution. Why isn't the FSC challenging the law at this level?
Why Burden of Proof Should Be on the Prosecution:
|
Mike, this is being argued on constitutional grounds, it's part of the FSC's appeal of certain parts of Judge Miller's decision.
They made their argument but the judge wouldn't enjoin the entire statute, only certain provisions of the statute. The judge doesn't work for the FSC and you can't blame them for his decision.