· R. v. McGuire (1983) 32 CR(3d) 381 (Ont. Co. Ct.)
· R. v. Deschamps (1978) 43 CCC (2d.) 45 (Ont.Prov. Ct.)
· R.v.Comber (1978) 28CCC (2) 244(Ont.Co.Ct.)
· Strong v. Comber (1975) 18 Cr L Q 258 (Ont. Co. Ct)
- U.S. vs Stevens. June 12, 2009 wherein the government is asking the Us Supreme Court to reverse the US Court of Appeal – “whether the prevention of animal cruelty constitutes a compelling governmental interest” in U.S. vs Stevens. This case is to be heard before the US Supreme Court in the fall of 2009. Stevens sold dog fighting videos across state lines. The Appellate court majority held that the legislation was unconstitutional as infringed on the 1st amendment regarding free expression. It pits the hunters and publishers against animal protectionists and law enforcement. The central issue – Is it a crime to sell videos of animal cruelty? The government argues that the videos cause social harm and lack any significant value. Stevens argues freedom of speech. There are 22 amicus briefs. The professor’s brief supports the fact that animal cruelty is a compelling government interest and therefore the charges did not violate the 1st Amendment – “Congress shall make no law respecting ….; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;…….”.
All the briefs listed below from United States v. Stevens.