So glad you brought this up today. Remember in December when you blogged about Texas "pole tax"?
You mentioned how it was narrower than your tax but included some of the same elements.
I thought that a Conservative proposing to raise a tax to infringe on the Constitutional right of freedomn of expression was hypocritical to say the least.
Well, today, a Texas judge ruled that the "pole tax", so similar to yours, was an unconstitutional tax on 1st Am rights and struck it down.
From the story out of Austin, TX
"Judge Scott Jenkins decided that exotic dancing is a form of expression, and therefore the fee violated the First Amendment right of free speech. ...
There was no word if state attorneys will appeal the case, but their chances of success are considered slim."
http://www.kxan.com/Global/story...&
nav=menu73_2_4
p.s. you also made a childish personal attack in that thread when you said that I must be a lousy lawyer to hold such an opinion.
If you care to respond, let's just stick to the merits.
A tax on porn, ect. has been challenged in court has been deemed constitutional. Check Utah. Taxation is not an infringement unless it is deemed so burdensome that it is in effect a ban. A person could say all taxes infringe on rights to purchase what ever. Football tickets are taxed at a different rate then other goods. Is that an unconstitutional infringement?
As for ability as a lawyer I let your poor knowledge of the constitution and the ideals of our founding fathers speak for itself.
Childish personal attacks? Around here? Nah ... never!
Lawyers BLAH! Rep you shouldn't be surprised at the lawyer's lack of knowledge of the Constitution and more surprised they spelled conservative correctly as well as a capital C sign of respect
Commenting by HaloScan
