Apparently you do not have a First Amendment right to photograph the police in Pennsylvania. Unless you do a little jig.

February 22, 2016

This could be a significant blow to the First Amendment, as apparently videotaping the police is not protected speech in Pennsylvania. Unless, of course, you also decide to yell at them or do a jig at the same time.

I wish I were joking, but I’m not…

Two cases before the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, were recently consolidated into one for the purpose of determining “whether photographing or filming police on our portable devices without challenging police is expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment.”

This is the trial court’s entire opinion, if you want to read the decision in its entirety.

The underlying facts are simple:

In the first case, Temple University student Richard Fields was standing on the sidewalk. There were 20 police officers standing outside a house party. Fields thought it was worth photographing for whatever reason. The police officer asked Fields to leave and stop taking pictures. Fields refused and continued to film. The police officer then took his phone and arrested him. Fields wasn’t taping the matter to protest the police or anything like that. He simply felt like recording it, maybe to put on Facebook, Instragram, or Philly Law Blog (holla!). The student did not claim to be protesting the police (or the house party for that matter), but merely recording the event.

In the second case, Amanda Geraci was at a protest. During the protest, the Philadelphia police arrested one of the protestors. Geraci moved closer to get a better view and hoped to videotape the incident. Geraci claims Officer Brown “attacked her” by physically restraining her against a pillar and preventing her from videotaping the arrest. Geraci claims that “I was just legal observing.”

Both sued the Philadelphia Police Department under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for First Amendment Retaliation.

Read the rest of this entry »


This Is the Article Central High School Doesn’t Want You To Read

January 9, 2016

A few weeks ago, Central High School student Michael Moroz wrote a piece for the student newspaper. It was part of a series on “Black Lives Matter”. One student wrote a piece supportive of Black Lives Matter, while Michael wrote a piece that was critical. Both articles were approved by a member of the faculty prior to publication. This is a PDF of both articles.

Michael’s piece created a firestorm of controversy at his school with the both the faculty and students. Since writing it, Michael has been subject to death threats and harassment. Others have called on the University of Pennsylvania to revoke Michael’s admission. All because they felt his view wasn’t the “right” one.

Yes, you read that right – there are people who want to destroy the life of a 17 year old young man because he has an opinion different than theirs.

Further, Central High School initially removed Michael’s article without removing the article supportive of Black Lives Matter. Then both articles were removed. Timothy McKenna, Central’s president — the school’s principal also serves as its president — admitted Tuesday that in hindsight, both pieces should have been removed simultaneously.

While Central High School might support censorship, Philly Law Blog does not. This is the article that Central High School doesn’t want you to read.
Read the rest of this entry »


The Feminist Inquisition of Heretic RooshV

August 16, 2015

Earlier in the week, I learned that something was brewing up north. RooshV said some stuff that made people upset, so they decided to try and kick him out of Canada, untruthfully brand him a rapist, throw a beer in his face, and then brag about the whole thing on the internet. They even posted a video of the assault on the internet.

As you might imagine, the people responsible for this unlawful mob justice behavior promptly went to jail.

Just kidding.

The Canadian government not only failed to press charges against the assailants, but some government officials actually joined in protests against Roosh.

This weekend I flew up to Toronto to get a closer look (and eat poutine). I even attended an “anti-rape / pro consent” rally to figure out what this is all about.

After spending the weekend in Toronto, I’ve had an opportunity to put my thoughts together.

Flying the Banner of Rape – How Feminism Went From Promoting Equality to Becoming a Cult Religion

Rape is a terrible thing. Understandably, the word and the concept triggers deep emotions in many, especially those who are rape victims.  Read the rest of this entry »


RooshV Wins Battle for Free Speech in Montreal; Also Gets Defamed and Assaulted

August 9, 2015

badb65c2868bc2a60c9bdd0ff56be419There is a new threat to freedom of speech around the world. On the internet, they’re called “social justice warriors.” “SJWs” are basically a loose group of left wing activists who take offense to everything anyone says. They thrive on outrage, no matter how silly.

These are the people who just finished college. You know, the kids we all try and avoid interacting with, because doing so will result in having stupid conversations about the dangers of heteronormative cisgendered privilege. While I find it just absolutely fascinating that you have a masters degree in gender studies, use big words I don’t understand, and work at Starbucks, can’t we just talk about sports or something fun? In years past, they were nothing more than a minor annoyance.

But lately it’s gotten a bit more, shall we say, real. Disagree with a political position? That’s “harassment” and “hate speech.” Suggest that men and women are equally responsible for their sexual endeavors? That’s “misogyny” and promotion of “rape culture.” SJWs fabricate assaults, death threats, rape threats, and all kinds of other crazy stuff to try and turn internet flame wars into real life. Social Justice Warriors are trying to ban speech of anyone who disagrees with their opinions, manipulating the concepts of “harassment”, “safety”, and “hate speech.” At the same time, they make actual physical threats against the people they disagree with, but apparently it’s okay because the SJWs think they’re right and it’s justified. Just look at what they tried to do to Mike Cernovich over an internet flame war.

As PDQ puts it: “SJWs turn to the same identity politics that they espouse to despise on its head and use it in ironic fashion to silence critics based on their identity: sex, gender, age, religion and sexual-orientation.  It’s easier to shut down a critic with “WTF DO U KNOW UR WHITE” than it is to have an NPR-style thoughtful exchange.  In the brevity of Twitter, SJWs have created a social-support system for each other against critics, which conjures up the new suffix “-splain”.   #Whitesplaining.  #Mansplaining.  #Cissplaining.”

Even a college professor admits that “[t]hings have changed since I started teaching. The vibe is different. I wish there were a less blunt way to put this, but my students sometimes scare me — particularly the liberal ones. … This shift in student-teacher dynamic placed many of the traditional goals of higher education — such as having students challenge their beliefs — off limits.”

The goal of SJWs is to silence anyone who disagrees with them or challenges their beliefs, through any means necessary.

In 2015, the internet is serious business.

Read the rest of this entry »