You may remember Roy Moore’s 2017 campaign in Alabama for the U.S. Senate in which a controversy arose as to his behavior at the Gadsden Mall several decades before. And, further, that there were allegations that he was banned from the mall because of his friendliness with teenage girls. Include one who at one point was “Santa’s little helper.” After losing that race, Moore brought a defamation suit against the purveyors of a political ad that mentioned these mall/teenage girl allegations in a certain, perhaps misleading, order. And he won. Except, the Eleventh Circuit has now reviewed the matter and ruled that under the First Amendment’s protective standard for speech concerning public figures, Moore actually lost. Suranjan Sen of IJ details the wacky story and the mysteries of “actual malice” and defamation by implication. Then, IJ’s Prashanta Augustine details an en banc denial in the Fifth Circuit where the judges decided not to take up a challenge to the federal ban on machine guns. Even though the full court dodges the issue some judges indicate they think there would be meritorious Second Amendment challenges to the law in the future. And one even suggests there could be a Commerce Clause challenge as well. Moore v. Cecil U.S. v. Wilson (en banc denial) U.S. v. Wilson (3 judge panel) 2003 Ninth Circuit machine guns opinion
Podzilla Summary coming soon
Sign up to get notified when the full AI-powered summary is ready.
Free forever for up to 3 podcasts. No credit card required.
Short Circuit 427 | Michigander Administrations
Short Circuit 426 | Vaccinated Home Distilling
Short Circuit 425 | Live from Penn Law!
Short Circuit 424 | Juries for Securities
Free AI-powered recaps of Short Circuit and your other favorite podcasts, delivered to your inbox.
Free forever for up to 3 podcasts. No credit card required.