Films Depicting Cruel and Unusual Torture and Killing of Small Animals Protected By the First Amendment - SCOTUS

SCOTUS agrees to allow the making and distribution of snuff films of small animals

Washington April 20, 2010


The United States Supreme Court, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing for an 8 to 1 majority, struck down a law that bans the making and distribution of films depicting women stomping small live animals to death with their bare feet or while wearing spiked heels. Roberts wrote that the law was over broad and violated the First Amendment right to free speech.

The law at issue establishes a criminal penalty of up to five years in prison for anyone who creates or sells a depiction of animal cruelty for commercial gain. It defines animal cruelty as intentionally maiming, torturing, wounding or killing an animal if the conduct is illegal where the creation or sale takes place. An exception is allowed for depictions with serious educational, journalistic or artistic value

The majority opinion (PDF) by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. stressed that the government had power to bar actual acts of animal cruelty, but not their portrayals, SCOTUSblog reports. Roberts said the law was overbroad and violated the First Amendment.

The court left open the question of whether or not the filming and distribution of films that depict the crushing of buffalo, elephants, and rhinoceroses with bulldozers would be accorded the same protections.

Only one member of the Court, who remained temporarily sane during the proceedings, objected to the practice in a separate dissenting opinion.

Justice Sam Alito, in a sharply worded dissent, said the other 8 justices had gone mad.