Portland Police Chief After Antifa Attacks: We Need Anti-Mask Law

[anthonycacace]

Vague laws are unconstitutional simply because they are vague. Goggle "vagueness doctrine". Vague laws get struck down all the time because of this. They usually get replaced by not so vague laws. That's why laws are written in complicated legal language that only lawyers can understand.

Sometimes they are struck down, but not always. AND, this doesn't happen until challenged in court to have it be determined invalid by a directly aggrieved party; so until that day, the law is in effect. In other words, a few otherwise 'innocent' people could be found guilty unless/until another litigates the unconstitutional basis angle.

Not really, because a full face helmet is not really a mask. It's a protective device or PPE. It's purpose is not to conceal identity, but to provide protection from impacts during a crash. Sure, an over zealous prosecutor could attempt to charge someone in a case like that, but it would likely get overturned on appeal and that's assuming a gran jury would indict and a jury would convict. That would also be too broad of an interpretation of the law which would also be unconstitutional.

Basically, an anti-mask law wouldn't be much different than laws against obstruction of justice, laws against destruction of evidence, and money laundering, in that they are designed to prevent people from concealing criminal activity and to hamper prosecution of such activity.If you think anti-mask laws are unconstitutional, then likewise all of those should be as well.

But, it depends on how a mask used in a demonstration is defined. I've never stated I thought it's disallowed, simply that the definition should be stringent.

For example, if the the law stated that a mask used in an act of terror was, "Any covering on or about the face during the perpetuation of an act of violence or aggression," I can see an option for a lawyer to rope in a full-face helmet worn in a fight as subject to it.

Now add to the end, "in order to influence public or political opinion, action or inaction, or in furtherance of a crime," then yes, this addition would lessen the possibility of a track fist-fight being subject to the law and is worded in a similar manner to that of the US Code's 'Obstruction of Justice' statute (18 USC 1503).

If it was a fight about presidential politics or another matter of public interest and not due to an on track incident however ... who knows as there still is a slight gray area.

[Clayton_Wetter]

Antifa supporter?????