KQED Forum, April 21, 2010 Host Michael Krasny
http://www.kqed.org/epArchive/R201004210900
“I think it’s important to understand that this is a relatively narrow decision. The court did not say what Congress could prohibit in terms of the depiction of animal cruelty. What they said is that the statute had language that was too broad. It portrayed any depiction of harmful acts involving killing animals or wounding animals. And even though there were a series of limitations to the prohibition, such as permitting these things if they were serious or religious or political or scientific, educational, journalistic, historical or artistic value, they nonetheless said the statue was too broad.”