It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Yes, an appeal would go against a tide of federal judges smashing limits on money in politics. But the case against Kentucky’s ethics law is built on shaky ground. Bertlesman spins out ridiculous hypotheticals to conclude that the law is too broad and vague.
He speculates, for example, that a lawmaker could be prosecuted for violating the gift ban if he is cooled by a lobbyist’s air conditioner. Or that a visit to a manufacturer that lobbies the legislature would be construed as an illegal economic benefit. Or that a lawmaker could unknowingly partake of post-funeral refreshments paid for by a lobbyist and be prosecuted. Puh-lease.
Generally speaking, a person who brings a defamation lawsuit must prove the following
2: The statement is about the plaintiff. The statement need not name the person explicitly if there is enough identifying information that those who know the person will recognize the statement as being about him or her. For more information, see the section on Who Can Sue For Defamation.
So some old guy at a demo beats a drum in the face of some 16yr old lad who stands his ground in a staring competition???