[Clips] [IP] Re: Judge: Americans need background checks to date internationally
R.A. Hettinga
rah at shipwright.com
Wed Apr 4 15:47:13 PDT 2007
--- begin forwarded text
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 18:45:18 -0400
To: "Philodox Clips List" <clips at philodox.com>
From: "R.A. Hettinga" <rah at shipwright.com>
Subject: [Clips] [IP] Re: Judge: Americans need background checks to date
internationally
Reply-To: clips-chat at philodox.com
Sender: clips-bounces at philodox.com
--- begin forwarded text
From: David Farber <dave at farber.net>
Subject: [IP] Re: Judge: Americans need background checks to date
internationally
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 17:42:37 -0400
To: ip at v2.listbox.com
Reply-To: dave at farber.net
<x-flowed>
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law"
<froomkin at law.miami.edu>
Date: April 4, 2007 5:01:54 PM EDT
To: David Farber <dave at farber.net>
Cc: ip at v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: [IP] Judge: Americans need background checks to date
internationally
Reply-To: froomkin at law.tm
This is totally misleading. It would of course violate the First
Amendment to have a law that stops you or me communicating over the
internet, even if it's to date foreigners.
What the law actually does is regulate MAIL ORDER BRIDE SERVICES and
IMMIGRATION PETITIONS FOR FOREIGN FIANCESS AND SPOUSES. Not amorous
internet users.
Repeat: this isn't about internet messages by regular people.
It's about (1) sales pitches to foreigners by mail order bride
companies and about whether they can disclose US client info to
foreign clients without the foreign client's "informed consent" --
which is defined to include doing a check for sex offendere
convictions of the US client and reporting any found to the foreign
client.
AND it's about
(2) what you have to do to get papers for your foreign spouse/fiance
("IMBRA requires a U.S. petitioner applying to sponsor a foreign
fiancie or spouse to report certain arrests and/or criminal
convictions for violent crimes, including domestic violence, sexual
assault, and child abuse.")
So this isn't "a sad day" for the Internet, and you remain free to
say "hello" to anyone you like. But it does mean that it's going to
be harder for sex offenders to trick unspecting women into becoming
their slaves (because if they come here on a fiance visa, and then
divorce in the first 2 years, they get deported -- think of the power
that gives the abusing husband....),
On Wed, 4 Apr 2007, David Farber wrote:
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Richard Forno <rforno at infowarrior.org>
> Date: April 4, 2007 3:25:35 PM EDT
> To: Infowarrior List <infowarrior at attrition.org>
> Cc: Dave Farber <dave at farber.net>
> Subject: Judge: Americans need background checks to date
> internationally
>
>
>
> US Judge Affirms IMBRA: Americans Must Have Criminal Checks Before
> Contacting Foreigners on Internet
>
> http://www.prweb.com/releases/2007/4/prweb515227.htm
>
> A new federal law that makes it a crime for Americans to
> communicate with
> foreigners on dating websites without criminal background checks is
> upheld
> by a federal judge.
>
> Washington, DC (PRWEB) April 2, 2007 -- On March 26, 2007, a new
> federal law
> restricting Americans from contacting foreigners through internet
> dating
> sites was upheld by a federal court after a Constitutional
> challenge by an
> internet dating company. In European Connections v. Alberto Gonzales,
> 1:06-CV-0426-CC, Judge Clarence Cooper of the US District Court for
> the
> Northern District of Georgia dismissed a lawsuit by European
> Connections
> which claimed that the law violated the right to freedom of speech
> contained
> in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The
> plaintiff had
> failed to challenge the law based on the First Amendment right to
> assemble.
>
> According to Tristan Laurent, President of the advocacy group
> Online Dating
> Rights, "We will now have to take legal action from the point of
> view of the
> users of online dating sites. The whole idea that it is now a crime
> for
> American men to send emails to women in other countries is so
> preposterous
> it is beyond belief. The judge's ruling that there is no
> Constitutional
> violation in forcing Americans to divulge all sorts of highly personal
> information to a complete stranger or scammer abroad before the
> American can
> even say hello or know to whom he is writing is only exceeded in
> foolishness
> by Congress in making the law."
>
> The law was originally called the International Matchmaker
> Regulation Act,
> but it did not pass Congress in previous years by that name and it
> was later
> named the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act (IMBRA)
> before it
> passed on December 17th, 2005. The law, which was attached to the
> reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) was
> apparently not
> debated in public and Mr. Laurent says that no dating company or
> dating site
> user was invited to a closed-door Senate hearing in July 2004.
>
> IMBRA makes it a felony for an internet dating company, that primarily
> focuses on introducing Americans to foreigners, to allow any
> American to
> communicate with any person of foreign nationality without first
> subjecting
> that American to a criminal background check, a sex offender check and
> without first having the American certify any previous convictions or
> arrests, any previous marriages or divorces any children and all
> states of
> residence since 18. Match.com is excluded from the law, and the
> judge found
> that this exception posed no challenge to the Fifth Amendment equal
> protection clause because American women are supposedly not abused by
> American men that they meet on the internet, and thus are not in
> need of
> protection.
>
> The law was sponsored by Sen. Sam Brownback, R-KS and Sen. Maria
> Cantwell,
> D-WA and was championed by key women's groups. The law was passed
> after
> these groups made claims that foreign women who marry American men are
> subjected to higher rates of abuse than are American women.
> However, the
> only study that addresses this issue was done by the INS in 1999
> and it
> found that the rate of abuse in such international marriages is one-
> seventh
> the rate of abuse in domestic marriages. See
> http://www.online-dating-rights.com/index.php?
> ind=downloads&op=entry_view&id
> en=24
>
> Online Dating Rights Director of Public Relations Jim Peterson said
> of the
> judge's ruling: "It is a sad day for freedom in our country when an
> American
> has to have a criminal background check before he can say 'Hello" to a
> foreigner through the internet." He also said that "America is the
> only
> country in the world that regulates communication between two
> consenting
> adults seeking to communicate via internet, with the possible
> exceptions of
> China and North Korea. Without new email technology, IMBRA could
> not have
> been even feasible because people generally sent paper letters to each
> other's home addresses just a few years ago. Is it right for the US
> government to make a form of communication illegal when it was the
> only form
> of communication possible just a few years ago?"
>
> The law has been attacked in a bipartisan fashion by prominent
> feminist
> Wendy McElroy
> http://www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2006/0111.html
> and by
> men's rights supporter David Usher
> http://capitolhillcoffeehouse.com/more.php?id=2444_0_1_0_M and by
> immigration attorney Gary Bala
> http://www.online-dating-rights.com/index.php?
> ind=downloads&op=entry_view&id
> en=21
>
> Mr. Laurent says that his organization has undertaken a fundraising
> drive to
> raise $100,000 for a class-action suit against the government on
> behalf of
> all the men who can no longer contact women in Canada, England,
> Germany,
> Russia and the Philippines due to this law. Contributors are asked
> to visit
> the website at www.online-dating-rights.com.
>
> Both Mr. Laurent and Mr. Peterson are available for media
> interviews but
> since both have to work for a living and do not receive federal
> taxpayer
> funding, arrangements for telephone interviews should be made by
> email if
> possible. Contact Mr. Laurent at onlinedatingrights @ yahoo.com and
> Mr.
> Peterson at veterans @ veteransabroad.com
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
> RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/7492317-93eb57
> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
--
http://www.icannwatch.org Personal Blog: http://www.discourse.net
A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | froomkin at law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
-->It's warm here.<--
-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
</x-flowed>
--- end forwarded text
--
-----------------
R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah at ibuc.com>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
_______________________________________________
Clips mailing list
Clips at philodox.com
http://www.philodox.com/mailman/listinfo/clips
--- end forwarded text
--
-----------------
R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah at ibuc.com>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy
mailing list