Talk:Virginia v. Black

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid	This article is on a subject of Mid-importance within WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.

[edit] True threat

I believe the proscribable category of the "true threat" existed prior to this case, and the language of the opinion of the court seems to bear me out on that. As I understand it, the crux of this case was not true threats, per se, but rather about the jury instructions indicating that the burning of a cross was prima facie evidence of "intent to intimidate" (which would constitute a true threat).

The ruling was that these jury instructions took the burden off the prosecution to prove "intent to intimidate", and that they were therefore unconstitutional. Juansmith 01:27, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I haven't read the case for awhile, but I'm pretty sure you're correct. Feel free to make the proper corrections to the article. Postdlf 02:09, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I will eventually; I just figured I'd mention it in case someone else didn't want to wait. I discovered this because I used Wikipedia to help me study for a constitutional law exam (making case flash cards and so forth), and the incorrect info about true threats caused me to get severely marked down on one of the short essay questions. Now that I (kinda) know the facts, I figure I should fix it, lest others suffer the same fate.Juansmith 07:35, 26 February 2006 (UTC)