this is in the state university in georgia bound by the first amendment. little did he know that zakaria started looking into his background. the scheme of during the case that they look into his religion and his psychological records and his medical records to make the case for punishing the student or kicking him out. he was upset so in protest he made a collage that he put on facebook that included all the consequences that he felt would happen with this parking garage and he called it the environmentalist group on campus the zakaria memorial parking garage the joke being this was a to be part of his legacy. he was already looking for an excuse to kick him out of school and the university flips a node under his door claiming this proved it was a collage attached proving that haydon was now clear and present danger to the campus. it was stapled to the notes and if anybody really wants it seriously they thought that they were a threat that is to be non-aggression, not the threat but they didn't even believe he was a threat because if someone is about to g

is this a first amendment issue? >> this is actually a hard case, i think, because it is true that physicians or anyone else can express any kind of opinion they want about homosexuality but it's also true that the state of california can regulate the practice of medicine, including telling doctors and any kind of care providers you can't mislead, give advice that will hurt patients. they can't prescribe laetrile to cure cancer because that doesn't work. what the state of california tried to do here is say that this kind of therapy is harmful, especially to children, and we as the state can stop it. that i think is close to legal, but it is also true that physicians and therapists do have certain rights to express their opinion about what works and what doesn't, and the judge tried to navigate between the two of those. >> but is this ruling, jeff, by the judge, the law, does it stop a therapist from speaking out against -- i mean, if they want to go on television and say being gay is bad or you know, against religiou

stated before, i strongly disagree with the 9th circuit's ruling which is a misreading of the first amendment to protect polluters with 1.6 million unwanted yellow page books every year. based on the same logic as the citizens united ruling that treats the free speech rights of corporate super p-a-cs to be the same as real people. but in light of that decision and in consultation with our city attorney, this legislation would be recommended to suspend implementation of our pilot program at least until future appellate proceedings determines that the seattle law is consistent with the first amendment. and, colleagues, i also want to mention that i'm still committed to finding policies that reduce yellow page blight and i'm working with the city attorney to hopefully draft new legislation to find alternate approaches to achieving the same goal. at this time, colleague, i hope you will be able to support this legislation in light of the 9th circuit. >> thank you. thank you, president chiu. supervisor wiener. >> i thank you and i want to thank president chiu for having pursued this legislation wh

this contradicts a ruling made monday by a different judge who says the law potentially violates first amendment rights. attorney general harris supports the ban and intends on defending the law. >>> clerical employees at the port of long beach and los angeles will go back to their jobs this morning follow allege eight-day strike. they reached a deal last night. the los angeles mayor took part in the negotiations

in that's the reason that they are filing this lawsuit saying that their first amendment rights were violated and ramon we have less than an hour left but i have to ask you because we are hearing also that some of the plaintiffs aren't even occupy activists they are journalists and the like and they're also caught up in the in breath this is complicate the lawsuit at all with this lawsuit in particular is a class action lawsuit only alleging that there was wrong fluoresce a violation of the first the fourth and the fourteenth amendment no sort of talk about the second amendment being violated as you remember a couple weeks ago we reported on calvin milan who is a reporter he is. alleging that the city violated his second amendment rights but in this case it's mostly just about the wrongful arrest and the police really taking away their right to protest at a time you know when the mayor had initially shown his support for them and the city has renewed and passed a resolution supporting occupy l.a. thank you so much for that report r.t. correspondent on the lead now in los angeles. mov

first amendment rights. >> we're going to explain how nesting birds have created a $5 million problem bart. -what's up? i'm chris. -and i'm erik. both: we're the fruit guys! back in 1998, we had this idea to deliver fresh fruit to offices in downtown san francisco. we built these wooden crates, filled these with fruit in my one-bedroom apartment. the fruit guys has been with bank of america since they first started. we work with them to help them grow and succeed. we're coming up on 50 employees and delivering to thousands of companies every week. i would definitely say this is a fruitful business. >>> homeowners in the south bay and the santa cruz mountains are cleaning up from mother nature's wrath. pine hill road reopened today after being closed for three days. homeowners say they're not getting the maintenance they need, due to county budget short falls. so now they're discussing possible bond measures. >>> crews are making progress in repairing a large sinkhole on mountain view drive in  lafayette. the city council also adopted an emergency declaration, establishing a $1 milli

supreme court applieded the national constitutional establishment and free exercise clauses of the first amendment against the states or centralizing debates about religion. >> host: but if the states had the control, it's written into the constitution, freedom of religion. >> guest: we did, indeed, but the first amendment begins congress shall enact no law. it was addressed only to the national government. >> host: were there restrictions by different states on religion? >> guest: oh, yes, there were. several states had religious establishments and most states limited the amount of property a religious organization could own, some taxed religious property. others banned given groups practices. for example, eventually, various states in the southwest banning polygamy, for example. >> host: so when it came to massachusetts, talk about massachusetts or pennsylvania, we're here in pennsylvania, as a case study of states, regulating religion. >> guest: sure. pennsylvania, for example, had an active blasphemy now, which we think of now as unconstitutional, but in the last case that was brought, the las

their own policies that have nothing to do with the government that may not be in line with the first amendment so we want to be a bulwark against this if these companies find that something is distasteful but it's not illegal and it's actually in the public interest and we want to be able to provide. these organizations with a way to still get money because you know this was a complete completely on precedent to chew a sion where you had a couple of congressmen calling up companies and basically pressuring them for political reasons to cut off a site that was was doing good work and so if that ever became something that they could get away with it would be basically an end around the first amendment and we want to make sure that never happens again and i was very frightening and it's a very frightening president to set to have these corporations kind of politicizing that issue especially when the first amendment but you know trevor are you worried at all about net neutrality i mean is net neutrality essentially dead when we're looking at the failure of the media reform movement in terms of loo

first amendment but you know trevor are you worried at all about net neutrality i mean is net neutrality essentially dead when we're looking at the failure of the media reform movement in terms of looking at anything the government seeks out as so-called reforms the f.c.c. has failed us really and stablish a net neutrality i mean what can we do to really protect that we have about a minute. well i think that's part of what we want we want to show is that actually the government has failed as far as transparency goes so far you know president obama made all sorts of promises really good promises in the beginning his first term but unfortunately he's gone. basically done a complete one eighty and all of these in the u.s. government has gone more secretive and question harder to come by and every more things are five and same time there is actually a renaissance going on right now in the journalism world there's all sorts of organizations popping up some of them are startups and some of them been around for a long time and they're really trying to do good work in this area and a lot of time

joining us from dallas, the author of the book 50 things liberals love to hate and first amendment attorneyrence walters. i must say i smiled when i learned about what the blogger did and mad that i didn't think of it first. good for the goose good for the gander gallagher? the move to publish the names of the gun permit holders set the blogosphere on fire and twitter. trying to intimidate the people clearly who are lawful gun other thans. go ahead. >> i understand the merits of his argument, i think it is an ugly business to start getting into publishing people's personal addresses injuries the blogger is right and pointing out the hypocrisy of what the anti-gun zeal lots are are trying to do. we should have learned something from stalkers and people who can show up on somebody's door step. surely there is a way to argue the issue on the merits. the anti-gun nuts are only using newtown as an opportunity to advance their agenda. i don't think it is as real good idea for our side meaning the prosecond amendment side to go crawling around in the gutter with those guys and do the same thing. i

you wrote earlier that you thought the first amendment was, basically, intended to cover political speech and only political speech. do you still think that? >> yeah, if you -- yes. if you look at the function speech serves, and i do that in this, in an article in there called "neutral principles and first amendment problems," justice brandeis specified about five functions of speech, and and only one of them is unique to speech. the others they share with everything else so that there's no reason to single out speech. in those cases for special protection. but political speech is the one kind of thing, the one kind of speech that's essential to run the government and to run our society. however, i've since become convinced that separating political from other forms of speech, scientific speech and so forth, is too difficult. and, -- and i, therefore, wage a scaled back version of controlled speech by courts. very much scaled back. >> host: so you would have the courts do very little controlling speech, is what you're saying? >> guest: that's right. well, there's a case which we don't wan

issue decided that the city of seattle with a camperable ordinance was able to do it under the first amendment. last week a circuit panel undid that case and they're in the protections and i disagree with the reading and to the polluters that litter on your footsteps and based on the same logic as the citizens united ruling and considers the corporate super pacs the same as real people but with our city attorney i am introducing legislation today and suspend our pilot programs until we see if seattle's law is consistent with the first amendment and i am working with the city attorney to find alternate approaches for the same goal. the rest i commit. >> thank you supervisor. supervisor. >> submit. >> thank you supervisor. >> supervisor mar. >> thank you madam clerk. i have several things. the first is my strong support for the neighborhood theater and in the richmond district. i have been supporting the survival of the neighborhood theaters and i am introducing a motion for what the city can do much more to protect the small independent theaters. i have been working hard to support the balboa t

. >>> a judge heard arguments in a case that involves privacy rights and the first amendment. >> reporter's known as one of san francisco's most outspoken gay rights activists, but he had little to say today as he pleaded not guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct. >> it snaps of political retribution. >> reporter: he took this photo of scott wiener and blogged that he tried to photograph him at a urinal. >> we will be fighting this case. and i think that despite the fact that the photograph was taken, we're talking fundamentally about a photograph of a gentleman at a sink. >> reporter: supervisor wiener released a statement through investigators. >> it is okay to exercise your first amendment rights. it is okay to protest to this degree. it is not okay to invade people's privacy like in this particular case. >> reporter: a judge ordered petrelas to stay 150 yards away from the supervisor. >> a regular attendee at the board of supervisors. effectively, the restraining order makes it very difficult for him to continue on as a journalist. >> reporter: his attorney says the case is now abo

this is all part of speech and thought that is protected by the first amendment. can't think of it just in political terms. then there's a third dimension, that speech is what allows you to define your persona and your personality. your speech, your thoughts, your belief, are who you are. and this is an essential human right. now, the supreme court in its first amendment case has protected speech. that is habeas -- habeas. we only get those cases. [laughter] >> we had a case recently protecting speech, video where there was described to me, i never look at these things, women in spiked heels killing little animals. we protected that. it was protected speech. we protected speech on the day of a funeral of a servicemen killed in the middle east. there were protesters and using derogatory words about gays, saying that the military would be doomed because it protects gays, on the day of the funeral. the supreme court said that's all right. now, at first glance, you then might think that the court in its first amendment jurisprudence has adopted, embraced the philosoph

they're exercising their first amendment rights, and we're here just exercising our second amendment rights. >> reporter: and incited by the national rifle association's call for armed guards in school. pratt said there needs to be more accountability for gun owners, including the mother of adam lanza. >> i think if the firearms were properly secured, this issue would have never happened. i think if the mother would have survived, she probably would have been held accountable for allowing those firearms to be accessed by somebody that was mentally unstable. >> reporter: those here for the protest said the answer is not more guns, rather, more gun control. >> how many people should carry guns? it's the character, the character, the caliber of our character rather than the caliber of our weapon. it's just not right. it's just insanity, insanity. >> reporter: there was a police presence here for the protest today, but it was all peaceful. everyone has gone home and the business has closed for the evening. reporting live from falls church, darcy spencer, news4. >> a parent of one of the

. >> item nine a first amendment too leafs one 48 one four with a california corporation operating an indoor out door casual dining restaurant located at taylor street through december 2019. good afternoon commission nears senior property manager i'll like to describe to you what i'm asking your approval for, give you a brief overview and tell you about the benefit associated with this and give you a brief background and then talk a little bit about the port retail leasing port policy that allows us to proceed on this and so i'm hear here to request the approval of the first amendment as read by the commissioner secretary. this is for an extension of the andre bow din least [spelling?] located in the octogon building there in fisherman's whof and they are offering to extend it in exchange for capital improvements and return 50,000 per year com additional renne and improve the visitor experience at the who have and take advantage of the new plaza that we just completed and pier prom iniad and [spelling?] and they are essential to the positive experience of the whof is the improving of

but i do believe i have a first amendment right not to be shot. have a first amendment right to peacefully assemble and there is no real conflict here. but the ability to protect the second amendment should not interfere with my ability as a citizen and my first amendment rights. we have to be smarter about this. the president is absolutely correct. we need to ban the assault weapons, the high magazine clips and cartridges. we need to improve our background system, the checking system, close the gun show loophole and further provide better mental health services for a variety of people. not just related to this particular incident. and the nuttiest part is mental health services are on the chopping block as it relates to the fiscal cliff. all of these issues are interrelated. and we just need to get our act together and stop messing around. this is a simple idea from a simple guy that we need not to spend any time talking about. >> let's take a look with somebody who agrees with you on the right. he said this about the nra's proposal. let's watch.

balancing the first amendment with the right of people to live their lives without fear. >> before we go to q and a from the audience, a quick word from our sponsors. >> sorry to interrupt but we want to keep the day moving quickly. to smeed up the lunch service, please remove your bags from the tables. water and refreshments are available. lunch will begin promptly at 12.30 so please make sure everything is off your table so the servers can facilitate a quick luncheon service and we'll get on with our program. sorry to interrupt. >> so any questions from the audience? did we have someone with a microphone? go ahead. >> i'll go first. i completely agree with what you said about everything against bullying, everything against all the misconceptions, the lack of education, it all has to begin with community. let me introduce myself, i am a regional director for region 6 and also an ob-gyn physician, also a physician. one of the things that i have come across, having dealt with in my education and everything else, is that the school itself is a huge community for the kids and if we leave

but the first amendment begins congress shall enact noval only address to the national government. >> were there restrictions by different states on religion? >> yes there were to read several states had religious and solutions. most states limited the amount of property and religious organizations, some tax religious property, others they and the give and group practices and thinking for example the eventually various states in the southwest, banning polygamy for example. >> it can to massachusetts, talk about messages or pennsylvania. we are here in pennsylvania as a case study of states regulating religion. >> sure. pennsylvanians.org sable had an active blasphemy law we that we would now think of as starkly as unconstitutional. in the last case that was brought to the last criminal prosecution under the law was actually blocked in the early 1970's, kind of bye accident against someone who had a slave in his window saying something like wanted radical carpenter speaks to crowds preaching peace, and of course this person met jesus but someone walking past thought of it as blasphemou

now, the supreme court in its first amendment cases has protected speech. that is hideous. we only get those cases we had a case recently protecting speech, videos, where it was described to me, i never look at these things, women in spikes heels killing little animals. we protected the oath. it was protected speech. we protected speech when on the day of a funeral of a service man killed in the middle east, there were protesters using derogatory words about gays, saying the military is all going to be doomed to predition because it protects gays on the day of the funeral. the supreme court said that's all right. at first glance you then might think the court in its first apartment jurisprudence has adopted, embraced the philosophy of relativism, of moral relativism. all ideas are equal. who are we to say one idea is better than the other? now, if we were going to have a philosophical argument you could make a very strong case that the philosophy of moral relativism, that all ideas, all art, all speech is equally good, you would find it a very strong argument against that.

nothing in the first amendment permits miss hernandez to avoid the i.d.ltimately judge garcia, who's the federal judge here, will rule against her, judgment for the school district. this case is dismissed. >> guys, thank you very much. we'll be back in about 20 minutes to talk about a legal setback in the penn state case, the university trying to delay a lawsuit brought on by a former assistant coach. >>> a growing problem in chicago, street violence. some dedicated people are taking young kids and turning around their lives. photojournalist derrick davis shows us how they're doing it. >> i grew up watching boxing all my life. boxing is really, really hard. [ bell ] it takes a lot of discipline. some people make it look easy, but it's really hard. as soon as i walk in those doors, i just fell in love with boxing. there are different things that the gym offers you and different things that the streets offer you. most of the time the street, it will lead you to death. that's the choice that you make. >> the streets are really, really bad. there's a good one

petrelis to continue on as a journalist. >> petrelis's attorney says the case is now about first amendment rights. the blogger is due back in court on january 7th. in san francisco, david stephenson, ktvu channel 2 news. >>> this santa clara county district attorney's office has an officer was justified when he shot and killed a man who was holding a girl at knife point. the san jose police officer shot 42-year-old tree le in the head last january. police say le had kidnapped an 11-year-old girl and used her as a shield in a stand off with officers at a home on pistachio avenue. the girl was unharmed and officer mauricio jimenez receive add medal of honor from the department. >>> cut off their gps tracking devices. last month a ktvu investigative report found that more than 1100 pa row lees statewide have removed the devices. most of them are sex offenders. under the state's prison realignment plan, those who get caught go to county jail. >> now, they've discover that if they cut off their bracelets sometimes there's no consequence because county jails are full. sometimes they go to county

they love the exercise the first amendment right, which they can, even hypocritically. doing it against the second amendment. they can't have one without the other. if you start talking about taking away the second amendment, that is a slippery slope. >> juan: protect your first amendment right. >> andrea: i didn't tell them that. in the ad they are speaking against -- gawps they are not. i don't think anyone wants to take away the second amendment right. you have a right to own a gun -- >> andrea: you don't? >> juan: it's wrong-headed in terms of a militia. you're not an militia. >> it's a militia. from another era. is freedom of the press outdated? printing presses -- >> juan: we still have printing presses. >> greg: you know i go to the gym every day for my quads, and cnn is on at that time. they ask this question how is the different than posting the prices of your homes? is that the dumbest question you heard in your life? that's cnn for you. i couldn't resist. eric has the latest on the fiscal cliff standoff. how is starbucks trying to help lawmakers come together?