Question

4 united states v. robert stevens 4 which best evaluates section i.d. of the summary of argument? case supreme court of the united states no. 08–769 united states petitioner v. robert j. stevens on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the third circuit april 20, 2010 order: judgment affirmed, reversing the opinion of the court. statement consolidated and statutory provisions involved 1. following a jury trial in the united states district court for the western district of pennsylvania, respondent was convicted on three counts of knowingly selling, offering for sale, and possessing depictions of animal cruelty, in violation of 18 u.s.c. § 48, the statute criminalizing the creation, sale, or possession of “depictions of animal cruelty,” defined as any visual or auditory depiction that portrays: (1) conduct in which a living animal is intentionally maimed, mutilated, tortured, wounded, or killed, if such conduct is illegal under federal or state law where the creation, sale, or possession takes place. a both child pornography and depictions of animal cruelty are protected by the first amendment b child pornography, but not depictions of animal cruelty, is highly protected by the first amendment c unlike child pornography, depictions of animal cruelty are highly unprotected by the first amendment d both child pornography and depictions of animal cruelty are highly unprotected by the first amendment

Explanation:

The case involves the First Amendment and legal analysis of speech related to animal cruelty and child pornography. Option D states both child pornography and illegal acts of animal cruelty are not protected by the First Amendment. This aligns with legal principles: child pornography is unprotected, and illegal animal cruelty - related speech (if it falls under unprotected categories) would also not be protected. Other options misstate protection: A says both are protected (wrong), B says child porn is protected (wrong), C says illegal animal cruelty acts are protected (wrong).

Answer:

D. Both child pornography and illegal acts of animal cruelty are not protected by the First Amendment.