Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Stevens

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided July 18, 2008No. 05-2497Published

1DissentCowen, Circuit Judge

The majority today declares that the Government can have no compelling interest in protecting animals from intentional and wanton acts of physical harm, and in doing so invalidates as unconstitutional a federal statute targeting the distribution and trafficking of depictions of these senseless acts of animal cruelty. Because we cannot agree, in light of the overwhelming body of law across the nation aimed at eradicating animal abuse, that the Government’s interest in ensuring the humane treatment of animals is anything less than of paramount importance, and because we conclude the speech…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Gregg v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. Broadrick v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. Roth v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957

34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API