With an 8 to 1 vote, the Supreme Court nullified a 1999 federal law designed to outlaw videos featuring animal cruelty, particularly crush videos. Crush fetish videos show small animals like rabbits, mice, puppies, or kittens, being slowly stomped or impaled to death by stiletto heels or bare feet.
The Supreme Court didn't find a compelling reason to exempt animal cruelty videos from first amendment protections as it did with child pornography. The court ruled that child pornography necessarily involves the abuse of children in the production of the videos. So why did the court not see how those who film and market videos of animal cruelty play a direct role in the abuse of the animals?
The problem may be that