{"id":3207,"date":"2003-04-24T18:48:54","date_gmt":"2003-04-24T22:48:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/2003\/04\/24\/verizon-loses-on-constitutional-issu"},"modified":"2003-04-24T18:48:54","modified_gmt":"2003-04-24T22:48:54","slug":"verizon-loses-on-constitutional-issues","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/2003\/04\/24\/verizon-loses-on-constitutional-issues\/","title":{"rendered":"Verizon Loses on Constitutional Issues"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a name='a153'><\/a><\/p>\n<p><P>Go <A href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/articles\/A33644-2003Apr24.html\">here<\/A> (via <A href=\"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/palfrey\/2003\/04\/24#a174\">John Palfrey)<\/A>. See <A href=\"http:\/\/msl1.mit.edu\/furdlog\/index.php?wl_mode=more&amp;wl_eid=268\">Furdlog<\/A> for more details.<\/P><br \/>\n<P>1.&nbsp; I can&#8217;t honestly say whether the first part of the opinion, dealing with Article III questions, is right or wrong.&nbsp; From what little I know about the subject,&nbsp;these&nbsp;issues are incredibly muddy, particularly when it comes to delineating &#8220;inferior offices&#8221; (see <A href=\"http:\/\/www.law.cornell.edu\/constitution\/constitution.articleii.html#section3\">Article II Section 2<\/A>&nbsp;and how Justice Rehnquist construes the independent counsel in upholding Congress&#8217; right to create it in <A href=\"http:\/\/www.law.umkc.edu\/faculty\/projects\/ftrials\/conlaw\/morrison.html\">Morrison v. Olson<\/A>) and &#8220;ministerial&#8221; duties (I recall this coming up in a federal-state distinction in <A href=\"http:\/\/supct.law.cornell.edu\/supct\/html\/95-1478.ZS.html\">Printz v. US<\/A>, which struck down part of the <A href=\"http:\/\/www.pbs.org\/newshour\/bb\/law\/december96\/brady_12-3.html\">Brady&nbsp;Bill<\/A> because it coopted state officials to administer a federal program).&nbsp; <\/P><br \/>\n<P>Along with citing <U>Morrison<\/U> repeatedly, the judge cites <A href=\"http:\/\/guidelinelaw.com\/fsglaw\/cases\/sc_Mistretta.htm\">Mistretta<\/A>, which upheld the use of federal judges on the US. Sentencing Commission to establish sentencing lengths.&nbsp; Both those cases exhibit a functional rather than a formalistic approach to separation of powers.&nbsp; Judge Bates seems to be taking a similar tact, allowing flexibility in how Congress creates these statutes.&nbsp; Note how the judge slips in an <U>Eldred<\/U> reference to support this deference.<\/P><br \/>\n<P>2.&nbsp; I think Frank summed up the First Amendment and overbreadth&nbsp;parts pretty well.&nbsp; Judge Bates does not buy that anyone&#8217;s privacy is really at stake.&nbsp; His reasoning seems to&nbsp;imply the person definitely was&nbsp;engaging in &#8220;unprotected conduct&#8221; (pg 27-28).&nbsp; When he begins to talk about safeguards in case the person was engaging in legal activity, he really overstates the requirements for copyright holders in 512.<\/P><br \/>\n<P>Whether he&#8217;s right or wrong constitutionally speaking, I don&#8217;t know.&nbsp; On a practical level, we all know that the RIAA and MPAA are in the power positions here.&nbsp; It&#8217;s going to very difficult to check this subpoena power.&nbsp; They will be able to pervasively monitor and identify users of P2P systems.<FONT face=\"TimesNewRoman\"><\/P><\/FONT><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Go here (via John Palfrey). See Furdlog for more details. 1.&nbsp; I can&#8217;t honestly say whether the first part of the opinion, dealing with Article III questions, is right or wrong.&nbsp; From what little I know about the subject,&nbsp;these&nbsp;issues are incredibly muddy, particularly when it comes to delineating &#8220;inferior offices&#8221; (see Article II Section 2&nbsp;and [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":72,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[84],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3207","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general-news"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3207","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/72"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3207"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3207\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3207"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3207"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3207"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}