Anonymity and the US Supreme Court
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Adam Lake's question about the legality of pseudonyms sent me trolling about Westlaw today, in search of some case law supporting the rule I learned (somewhere .. sigh.) - that pseudonyms are OK as long as there's no intent to defraud. No luck there yet, but I did find an interesting passage in an opinion which found a LA city ordinance void which required that any handbill have upon it the "true name and address" of the persons responsible for it. "Anonymous pamphlets, leaflets, brochures and even books have played an important role in the progress of mankind. Persecuted groups and sects from time to time throughout history have been able to criticize oppressive practices and laws either anonymously or not at all." It later says "Even the Federalist Papers, written in favor of the adoption of our Constitution, were published under fictitious names. It is plain that anonymity has sometimes been assumed for the most constructive purposes." Cite is _Talley v. State of California_, 362 U.S. 60, 64-65, 80 S.Ct. 536, 538-539 (1960). -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCVAgUBLas8qH3YhjZY3fMNAQGHogP+KZKWULNE7wftUNKGVJmdaJ4zpjaVywfS IQqpu0duzbORLyKVIV4ZtAGrAnItMV/ZDNwg2KyDoHasUUNKQeBMKYXp+4KpxFL2 flreCRCe/ZqKQ4+EJzNQXT4HtQglbDO3Tl3aM411urnhFLhTCorrbTW4NChhd3S8 6TIdKCFnD4Q= =Bp6d -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (1)
-
gregļ¼ ideath.goldenbear.com