The US Supreme Court is not just corrupt.
I can't understand how this is not just designed to create pain and social collapse.
#SCOTUS sided with a stalker issuing threats, because he was deluded enough he didnt know his threats were threats. #SCOTUS nullified a conviction of a threatening stalker convicted of issuing threats because he was deluded, so his threats are "free speech"
SCOTUS NEEDS REFORM.
"Supreme Court Guts Protections for Cyberstalking Victims"
That's not what happened, though.
The SCOTUS doesn't really rule on things like stalkers. The Court rules on other courts, judging what other courts did, not the basic case itself.
SCOTUS said that the lower court didn't get 1st Amendment law correct, regardless of who might have been in front of the court, and said it needed to consider it a different way that affords everyone who might come before the lower court a different level of protection.
The Supreme Court didn't nullify the conviction of a stalker. It told a lower court to protect free speech, as the US Constitution demands.
No, that's not what that means.
In fact, the Court rejected the stalker's request that the whole charge be thrown out. The Court OPPOSED the stalker's request.
But no, that's simply not how the SCOTUS works as it hears appeals, and you can see that happen over and over in opinions: even when it might want to side with or against the petitioner, its job is to judge the lower court, not to try the accused person all over again.
If nothing else remember that that would violate double jeopardy.
It's not allowed in the US court system.
@volkris
"While the court sided with Counterman, his particular case will now be remanded to the lower courts, where the state will now have to prove that he was, in fact, reckless in sending the messages in question."
Sided with stalkers.