_Nitke_ Net Censorship Case Progress Update
Update on the Nitke v. Gonzales court case, which concerns Internet censorship and the conflict between US obscenity law and the global properties of the Net. I'm an expert witness.
The following is a post echoed from The Wirenius Report Blog, from the case's main lawyer John Wirenius:
By Seth Finkelstein | posted in nitke-v-ashcroft | on March 03, 2006 11:40 PM (Infothought permalink)Monday, February 20th, 2006
1:09 pm Just a Quick NoteBlogging has been light for the past two weeks, because of another round of briefing in Nitke v. Gonzales. Very briefly, the state of play is this: Our jurisdictional statement (a document asserting that (1) the case is before the Supreme Court as of right, and (2) that the Court should order full briefing and oral argument, rather than just decide it on limited papers) was filed in late October, 2005. The Government obtained one extension of time to file a response from the Court, and then asked for two more from us. Because the briefing calendar wouldn't be affected materially as far as I can tell--the Court has a pretty full docket for this term already, we granted the extensions (not to mention the Court would have, traditionally, given them anyway).
The Government filed its response on February 9, 2006. The Government did not contest that the case was properly before the Supreme Court, but requested that the Court affirm the lower court decision against us on limited briefing, without argument. We have a right of reply--limited to ten pages--and are filing our reply brief this week.
All of these documents will be made available on www.wireniusreport.net
