Thompson, Ex Parte Ronald

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that photographs and visual recordings, as well as the purposeful creation of them, are inherently expressive and are protected by the First Amendment
• concluding that statute “discriminating on the basis of the sexual thought that underlies the creation of photographs 3 or visual recordings” discriminated “on the basis of content”
• noting that the categories of speech that are exempt from First Amendment protection are limited and heeding Supreme Court’s admonition against creation of new categories
• holding the Improper Photography or Visual Recording statute unconstitutionally overbroad in violation of the First Amendment
• indicating that intent to threaten or intimidate “might help to eliminate First Amendment concerns”
• observing that the \[g]overnment has greater leeway to regulate [speech] when a nonpublic forum is involved or when serious privacy interests are implicated\; First Amendment limits \are less rigorous when the speech involves matters of purely private concern\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).