#T3BE 272 - Early Answer for Patrons
Added 2022-04-18 23:00:00 +0000 UTCThis question asks the facts of Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 US 781 (1989) -- and so sadly, Thomas gets it wrong, guessing A (with a backup of D), when the correct answer is (C). Thomas is now 143-for-272 (52.6%).
Comments
The correct level of scrutiny is what is listed in A but the result should be as in C (ie the band loses). Even the answer explanation applies “important” interest and not “least restrictive means.” Least restrictive means is a higher standard, and if you read Ward v RAR, Kennedy explicitly states that they DO NOT apply least restrictive means here because it is content-neutral. Annoying question
Jack Baumruk
2022-04-22 13:54:29 +0000 UTCI didn't have a guess on the answer but I was imagining that this question was alluding to some transformational shift as well. For example, the shell/ampitheater design may be sufficient for a symphony but what about the first 'electric guitar artist'.
Ghost of Jerry Thomas
2022-04-20 14:12:18 +0000 UTCI dispute this one! The question fails to explain what is meant by the city's audio equipment being "insufficient". If that means it's just not up to the band's quality standards, then I agree it's (C). Seems like that was the situation in the Rock Against Racism case. However, the question points out that the band is of a unique genre. What if their musical equipment is so unique that it cannot practically be connected to the city's system? In that case, this rule would be discriminating against content. And the rule could easily be replaced with a volume meter. Therefore I guessed (B). Andrew Bird is one of my favorite musicians. He utilizes a custom built rotating horn speaker in his concerts. It's basically part instrument, part amplifier. He would not be able to play at this stadium or he would have to cut out part of his performance.
Quark Twain
2022-04-20 13:31:35 +0000 UTC
