In a dissenting opinion, Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Alito cited an amicus brief filed by the Law School’s Center on the Administration of Criminal Law. United States v. Stevens involved a First Amendment challenge to a federal law that criminalizes visual depiction of animal cruelty—in this case videos of dogfighting. In an April 20 ruling, the Court held the law was overbroad and unconstitutional. The Center’s brief, which argued in support of the law, was filed in partnership with former solicitor general Paul Clement, who heads the national appellate practice at King & Spalding. Clement currently serves on the Center’s board of advisors and is an adjunct professor at the Law School. Alito quoted a portion of the Center’s brief that stated, “Selling videos of dogfights effectively abets the underlying crimes by providing a market for dogfighting while allowing actual dogfights to remain underground.”
Posted April 21, 2010