E-MAIL SOLICITATION Court rules against state's anti-spam law

By Christopher Dunagan, Sun Staff

Jim Kendall of Telebyte Northwest in Silverdale is grinding his teeth about a new court ruling that seems to protect e-mail "spammers."

A King County Superior Court judge ruled Friday that Washington's anti-spam law  which Kendall helped push through the Legislature  is unconstitutional in its attempt to reduce unsolicited e-mail....

http://www.thesunlink.com/news/2000/march/0315a1e.html

Has everyone forgotton that rulings are based on interpretation of Laws and that Judges can and frequently do, disagree on the meanings of Law? Anyone who thinks Judges decisions are not politically motivated on many occasions would have to be a dunce.

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), March 15, 2000

Answers

I don't think that anyone has forgotten that rulings are based on interpretation of laws, or that judges frequently disagree. That's why an appeal process exists.

But just how is ruling that the anti-spam law is unconstitutional a politically motivated act? I'd have to venture a guess that a vast majority of people in King County rather like the anti-spam law, and that the judge isn't bending to the wishes of that vast and powerful junk e-mail lobby. He just happens to interpret the law to violate the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution.

This is more of an example of how acts of the legislature are frequently declared unconstitutional even more than acts of the people.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), March 15, 2000.

"Anyone who thinks Judges decisions are not politically motivated on many occasions would have to be adunce."

Tell me, Marsha: Do you problem with representative democracy (as opposed to direct democracy)?

or How about Rule of Law (as opposed to Mob Rule)?

Read the Judge's ruling, this is exactly what he sites in declaring 695 (part-B only) unconstitutional.

If you like Mob Rule and Direct democratic rule then I agree, you might have a problem with the judges decision, but I dont think you do!

Once again, Can you empirically prove that this judge's decision was politically modivated?

This is 100% PURE sour grapes. If the Judge had decided in your favor, you would be under his desk with knee-pads on in a heart-beat.

-- Merciful Nate (mercifuln8@yahoo.com), March 15, 2000.

Merciful,

Are you jumping to conclusions, or just stupid? What part of my post had anything to do with the ruling on I-695?

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), March 15, 2000.

Patrick,

I was using this case as an example of an intrepretation of Law to make the point that we all have differing opinions, Judges are no exception. While this is obvious to you, it apparently does not occur to some forum participants, by some of the posts I have read.

I believe Judges ARE politically motivated as it would be naive to think otherwise. Do I think it is wrong for a Judge to be politically motivated? No. I consider it a fact of life. Do I think it is the basis for an entire ruling? Heck no.

It appears some here think polical motivation is a deadly sin and need a reality check!

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), March 15, 2000.