Buzz
06-03-2004, 03:43 AM
Back in February, Daniel posted under Special Announcements a thread about the DPA suing the government over not allowing for pro-drug ads at certain venues.
In my local paper today the following short brief on the results:
Judge rules law restricting pro-pot ads unconstitutional
WASHINGTON - A judge said yesterday that a federal law aimed at restricting the display of paid, pro-marijuana ads in buses and subway stations is unconstitutional, improperly infringing on free-speech rights.
The ruling by Judge Paul Friedman of US District came in a lawsuit challenging the law that cuts up to #3.1 billion in federal money to local transit authorities if they display ads promoting the legalization or medical use of marijuana or other drugs.
Fearing a loss of at least $85 million in federal aid, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority earlier this year declined to run ads submitted by the American Civil Liberties Union and three drug advocacy groups.
Short but sweet, justice is still hanging on to the short hairs.
[ June 03, 2004, 04:46 AM: Message edited by: Buzz ]
In my local paper today the following short brief on the results:
Judge rules law restricting pro-pot ads unconstitutional
WASHINGTON - A judge said yesterday that a federal law aimed at restricting the display of paid, pro-marijuana ads in buses and subway stations is unconstitutional, improperly infringing on free-speech rights.
The ruling by Judge Paul Friedman of US District came in a lawsuit challenging the law that cuts up to #3.1 billion in federal money to local transit authorities if they display ads promoting the legalization or medical use of marijuana or other drugs.
Fearing a loss of at least $85 million in federal aid, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority earlier this year declined to run ads submitted by the American Civil Liberties Union and three drug advocacy groups.
Short but sweet, justice is still hanging on to the short hairs.
[ June 03, 2004, 04:46 AM: Message edited by: Buzz ]