EFF argues DMCA section 1201(a) violates First Amendment

eff.org

61 points·ronsor··9 comments

"EFF and co-counsel filed this lawsuit in 2016" The slow and steady pace of justice

While courts are usually slow, it feels as if they very much want to avoid this particular case.

Welcome to the same bin all those Second Amendment cases get tossed into.

2a cases are in a worse bin. Several circuit are taking unprecedented actions to keep these cases from getting to SCOTUS. Read the comments here:

https://old.reddit.com/r/supremecourt/comments/195rsgl/14_mo...

https://old.reddit.com/r/supremecourt/comments/174vlru/dunca...

I'm enjoying the notion that the Bruen precedent could be used to restore the 1792 Militia Act. Burdening white men with finding a flintlock and knapsack in this day and age has me in stitches.

No it couldn't because laws establishing militias (including the National Guard) do not place a burden on the right to keep and bear arms. Bruen's THT test is never triggered.

You didn't read that right; at no point did I take the outcome seriously.

But the real point isn't Bruen's specific test: it's the precedent established that activist judges can rewind legal interpretation by centuries which is concerning. Our legislative history contains some real doozies that we don't want coming back.

They didn't rewind legal interpretations. If you're referring to the individual rights vs "collective" rights debate from Heller (which Bruen reaffirmed), the historical record is strongly in favor of individual rights.

Contrary to what you believe, finding a flintlock isn't all that hard.[1] It even comes in tacticool black.

https://muzzle-loaders.com/collections/traditional-muzzleloa...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com