Following up on Monday’s post about the controversy over nominee Janice Brown’s dissent from Aguilar, a California Supreme Court decision which extended the reach of harassment law at the expense of free speech: James Taranto notes (May 31) that at the time the court handed down its decision in Aguilar, the San Francisco Chronicle described it as a “blockbuster” that “stunned constitutional experts”. He wonders: “How can dissent from a decision that ‘stunned constitutional experts’ turn in a few years into a view that’s totally ‘out of the mainstream’ [the New York Times’ words]?” And Eugene Volokh (Jun. 1, crediting Hans Bader) points out that while the AFL-CIO now blasts Brown for her “troubling and extreme” refusal to go along with the Aguilar majority, “the National Writers Union — a member union of the AFL-CIO — proudly filed an amicus brief urging the same result that Justice Brown endorsed.”
Aguilar v. Avis and Janice Rogers Brown
Following up on Monday’s post about the controversy over nominee Janice Brown’s dissent from Aguilar, a California Supreme Court decision which extended the reach of harassment law at the expense of free speech: James Taranto notes (May 31) that at the time the court handed down its decision in Aguilar, the San Francisco Chronicle described […]
Comments are closed.