Originally Posted by
Mojotex
Supreme court voted 8-1 that the restriction on selling animal cruelty films, photos, videos, etc. is protected by the 1st Amendment.
There decision was derived from the content of Dog Fighting videos, I believe.
However, I do see the correlation.
The difference here being that Hayne intentionally intended to kill these deer. At worst the merits of the video part of the case are thrown out. In my opinion, the case can still be tried as a poaching case, as in the videos, he is plainly seen to be "aiming" for the deer.