Arizona Senate wipes own ass with 1st Amendment

[rinsd]

Lawmakers seek to stop anti-war T-shirts from naming dead soldiers

By Howard Fischer
Capitol Media Services
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 05.14.2007


PHOENIX -- State lawmakers voted Monday to enact new laws designed to stop the sale of anti-war T-shirts with the names of dead soldiers -- a measure a veteran media lawyer says is "unconstitutional about three or four different ways."

On a 28-0 margin, the Senate agreed to make it punishable by up to a year in jail to use the names of deceased soldiers to help sell goods. The measure, SB 1014, also would let families go to court to stop the sales and collect damages.

Dan Frazier, a Flagstaff businessman who is selling the T-shirts that have caused all the fuss, told Capitol Media Services he doesn't intend to halt the sale of the $20 shirts even if Gov. Janet Napolitano signs the measure. He said it's an illegal infringement on his First Amendment rights.

Rep. Jonathan Paton, R-Tucson, a backer of the measure, doesn't see it that way. He said because Frazier is selling his shirts for a profit means it is not constitutionally protected political speech.

More at the link - http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/183041.php

[AZBlue]

1. I thought that way until I thought about it from the families' point of view.

I would be pissed as hell if someone made money using the name of my dead husband, son, father, mother, wife, daughter, friend, neighbor or colleague. Many of these t-shirts sellers don't donate a dime to any relieft agency or stop-the-war fund - they are simply making money for themselves.

[rinsd]

5. Its not seemly but the 1st amendment does not care.

If the families decided to pursue unfair usage of their names, I would support that.

But this is a state legislature stepping in with a new law.

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. I can see both sides of this

This guy needs to donate his profits. It seems wrong for him to be making money off of these shirts.

[Bobbieo]

6. In essence, the t-shirt seller is a 'war profiteer'.

[blondeatlast]

3. This isn't like anna Nicole Smith; the soldiers didn't choose to be public figures.

OTOH, I think it's unConstitutional.

In this case, it would be nice if decorum and sensitivity would prevail, but it's too late for that.

[VP505]

4. So what happened to

RePuke love of FREE ENTERPRISE and market driven demand for products, f**K*** hypocrites.

[ThoughtCriminal]

7. Even commercial use is protected by 1st Amendment

Could they make it illegal to sell a newpaper if it had the name of a dead soldier? By Rep. Paton's reasoning, they could. Newpapers and other media are sold for profit too.

The AZ Legislature is not exactly loaded with Constitutional scholars, but they actually know it's unconstitutional. It panders to a certain constituancy and if it's thrown out, they will whine about "Activist Liberal Judges".

[WinkyDink]

8. And isn't it now legal for corporations to LIE?

[zonmoy]

9. it has been that way since the first bad decision making corporations

into people.