censorship free speechby KIT DANIELS | INFOWARS.COM | MARCH 31, 2015
California Polytechnic State University-Pomona is now requiring students who engage in free speech activities on campus to apply for a permit issued weekdays between 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.

The public university recently required student Nicolas Tomas, who was handing out flyers, to not only get a “free speech permit” but to also seek approval from school officials over the content of his hand-outs and to restrict his activity to a campus “free-speech zone.”

“Cal Poly Pomona’s campus policies impose a web of restrictions before students can distribute literature on campus: They must check in with the Office of Student Life, allow the school to copy their IDs, and wear badges signed by an administrator,” reported the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, who is helping Tomas sue the school. “Even then, would-be speakers are relegated to the so-called ‘free speech zone.’ Badges can only be issued from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on weekdays, although the Office of Student Life pledges to ‘work with’ any student who wishes to engage in expressive activity on evenings or weekends.”

“Additionally, students must register in advance for outdoor events, and the Office of Student Life must approve all flyers and posters.”
As draconian as this sounds, it’s becoming quite the norm in America.

Last fall, officials at Dixie State University in St. George, Utah, refused to allow libertarian students to hand out flyers poking fun at U.S. presidents because the campus “forbids” mocking.

The students responded with a lawsuit.

“Campus officials denied the flyers on the grounds that they violated school policy, which does not allow students to disparage others, according to the lawsuit,” reported Andrew Desiderio of the College Fix. “But the students, members of Young Americans for Liberty, allege their free speech rights have been infringed, and a leader of the group said in an interview administrators are ‘silencing and marginalizing’ them.”

Similarly, earlier this month a judge in Xenia, Ohio declared “there will be no mentioning of the Constitution” during a pre-trial hearing for a journalist who was cited for protesting against an anti-panhandling ordinance.

The judge said this while laughing at the journalist, Virgil Vaduva, who was arguing that his protest on a public sidewalk constituted free speech.

The prosecutor in the case also claimed that mentioning the Constitution during the trial would “confuse the jury,” despite the fact it’s the supreme law of the land.

FUCK the Nevada “Supreme” Kangaroo Court – Strippers have 1st Amendment Rights

stippersRENO, Nev. ( & KRNV) — The Nevada Supreme Court has decided a 10 percent tax on strip club admission doesn’t violate exotic dancers’ first amendment rights of free expression. vince neil

Justices ruled it was constitutional to tax the clubs and other live entertainment because the tax is content-neutral, doesn’t target a small group of people, and doesn’t threaten to suppress ideas or viewpoints.

The broad-based tax applies to many events but exempts some live entertainment, including boxing, Nascar races and minor league baseball.

nevada supreme court

judge tatroStrippers Argue Free Speech In Court, Don’t Stay In Vegas
Comment Now Follow Comments

The Nevada Supreme Court will decide whether Vegas strip clubs must pay a 10% entertainment tax imposed by state law. The tax covers fees, food and drinks. Although the clubs have been forced to pay it since 2003, they claim it’s unconstitutional and want a refund.

Why? Exotic dancers have First Amendment rights, the clubs say. This tax violates the Constitution. Sound crazy? It depends.

Lawyers for eight strip clubs say the tax violates the right to free speech. But the Nevada Department of Taxation sees the tax as just another excise tax on business transactions. An excise tax is like a sales tax only more targeted. Some people call these sin taxes, and that’s a name that seems apt here. vegas strip bus

Several courts have heard the case since 2006. But in case after case, Nevada’s tax has been upheld so far. Now Nevada’s highest court will take a look. Most observers think the tax will be upheld.

In fact, in other states taxes on similar activity have generally passed constitutional muster. In New York, court battles brewed for years over a sales tax exemption that was applied to artistic performances like ballet but not to so-called exotic dance. The question was whether lap dances could be classified as “art” and therefore be tax-exempt.

A key suit was filed by a New York club called Nite Moves. An adult juice bar, the club serves no alcohol but does serve lap dances. The club claimed lap dances were art so were tax-exempt, but the club consistently lost. See 677 New Loudon Corp., dba Nite Moves v. New York Tax Appeals Tribunal.
strip clubsThe club’s revenue comes from admission charges, sales of non-alcoholic beverages, and exotic dances. New York is collecting sales tax on the dances. The club relied on an exemption for musical performances.

Some argued only choreographed dances count, while lap dances are more extemporaneous. After losing in New York’s highest court, Nite Moves fired off a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear its appeal. That petition was rejected by SCOTUS.

Texas also has a Sexually Oriented Business Fee, generally referred to as a pole tax. It collects $5 from each patron of clubs featuring nudity and serving alcohol. There have been court battles over this tax too, but the Texas Supreme Court eventually upheld it. Dancing may be a way of expressing yourself, but the pole tax doesn’t violate the First Amendment, the court strip

Even Illinois now has a pole tax. Getting any tax ruled as unconstitutional is tough. And while the specific language and effect of any tax must be examined, the likelihood of the free speech argument carrying the day seems small.

You can reach me at This discussion is not intended as legal advice, and cannot be relied upon for any purpose without the services of a qualified professional.


stip club

1st amendment9th Circuit to strip-club dancers: Keep your distance

Friday, January 28, 2005

LA HABRA, Calif. — A federal appeals court has upheld La Habra’s ordinance requiring strip-club dancers to stay at least 24 inches from customers.


The ordinance was designed to target lap dancing, which the city claims is responsible for prostitution, crime, drug use and disease.


In a 3-0 ruling on Jan.26, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected arguments by Bill Badi Gammoh, owner of the city’s only adult-entertainment club, and by several lap dancers that the ordinance is unconstitutional.


The 2-foot limit does not deny the dancers their ability to perform, the judges said in Gammoh v. City of La Habra.


Attorney Deborah Fox, who represented the city in its fight with the owner of Taboo Gentleman’s Club, said it was an important ruling because “lap dancing is the financial linchpin of the adult industry and this is the end of the argument about its prohibition.”


Gammoh’s fight with the city began shortly after he opened the strip club in 1998 and filed a lawsuit challenging the city’s anti-lap dance ordinance as vague and unconstitutional.


The ordinance “unfairly impedes on (a dancer’s) right to expression and speech,” attorney Scott Wellman said.


The 9th Circuit disagreed. “The 2-foot rule,” Judge Richard Tallman wrote, “merely requires that dancers give their performances from a slight distance; it does not prohibit them from giving their performances altogether.”


Meanwhile, a Nevada judge ruled on Jan. 21 that a Las Vegas law prohibiting strippers from fondling customers during lap dances is unconstitutionally vague.


District Court Judge Sally Loehrer affirmed a lower court ruling that as many as five misdemeanor criminal cases filed against Las Vegas strippers should be dismissed.


The Jan. 21 ruling affects only dancers within city limits. The Clark County Commission in 2002 limited touching between strippers and patrons during private lap dances, specifically barring strippers from touching or sitting on the customer’s genital area. But the municipal code was not as specific, saying only that strippers and their patrons should not “fondle” or “caress” each other.

Under Loehrer’s ruling, no dancer in the city can be arrested for violating the municipal code. The city is considering an appeal.

Mountain Democrat Newspaper reader asks “Why can Ty protest?”

mountain democrat

Vern Pierson protest

Vern Pierson protest

Why can Ty protest?

Mr. Ty Robben protested in front of the DA’s Office.  I believe District Attorney Vern Pierson said at that time that Mr. Robben had a First Amendment right to protest.

Since then, Mr. Robben was arrested on false charges in Nevada and those charges were dropped.1st amendment

I’m asking Mr. Pierson to expound on his interpretation of the Constitutional Rights of a citizen to protest so that all citizens will feel safe should we feel the need to protest as Ty Robben did.


 Letters to the Editor Discussion | 5 comments

  • Justice InsiderJune 19, 2014 – 9:06 pmMs. Weltee, DA Pierson has never interfered in a persons right to protest. I can’t recall him ever filing charges on anybody who chooses to protest peacefully. (Peacefully, meaning not causing harm to others or property damage) Mr. Robben protested and Mr. Pierson didn’t interfere. Mr. Robben had some issues in Nevada, however that’s another state.Reply | Report abusive comment
  • The original and real Oh BrotherJune 20, 2014 – 8:24 amSo Justice Insider you ARE a spokesperson for the District Attorney Vern Pierson. I can’t believe there really is a person working for the DA posting on this website. Not impressed and sad to hear that the stories are true about you and your employer.Reply | Report abusive comment
  • The original and real Oh BrotherJune 21, 2014 – 9:05 am@ Justice Insider – You have made no reply to my statement about the stories being true that you are in fact Mr. Piersons side kick from the DA office posting on this website. So now I will ask you. Are you the employee within the District Attorneys office that has been posting on this webite with, of course, inside information. Making this a true story? You appear to be answering this letter to the editor on behalf of Vern Pierson. | Report abusive comment
  • agent provocateurJune 21, 2014 – 4:05 pmHi, this is Ty Robben and Google just informed me of this post. For the record, Vern Pierson DID NOT interfere with my protests in Placerville. In fact, he was very respectful, and I respect him for that part unlike the thugs in Nevada like Carson City “Judge” John Tatro, DA Neil Rombardo and his corrupt assistant Mark Krueger and the CCSO Sheriff Ken Furlong. I was arrested by the Nevada idiots with all charges being dropped and now I am suing them in Federal Court for an array of Constitutional violations including 1st amendment and malicious prosecution, etc. So as bad as Vern Pierson may be, he’s not as bad as the criminals in Carson City!Reply | Report abusive comment
  • agent provocateurJune 21, 2014 – 4:12 pmSee my website Nevada State Personnel WATCH for my story. Placerville and EDC is a utopia compared to corrupt Carson City Nevada folks. Do not go to Carson City! I think even Vern Pierson would be shocked at the corruption in my cases out of Carson City.Reply | Report abusive