Wrong Element
Sentient Onion
- Joined
- May 5, 2002
- Posts
- 24,909
The charge that sharia was applied in this case is obviously bogus. There is no reason to disbelieve the statement that the defendant got off based on lack of evidence to convict.
But: for a judge to say "you’re way outside your bounds of First Amendment rights" is just bizarre. There's nothing in this story that suggests the guy engaged in non-protected speech, and it was a gratuitous remark anyway because he is not there to rule on constitutional matters. If this is a basic enough concept for a non-lawyer to understand, what's the judge's excuse for being ignorant?
But: for a judge to say "you’re way outside your bounds of First Amendment rights" is just bizarre. There's nothing in this story that suggests the guy engaged in non-protected speech, and it was a gratuitous remark anyway because he is not there to rule on constitutional matters. If this is a basic enough concept for a non-lawyer to understand, what's the judge's excuse for being ignorant?