Keene

Keene v. Meese

Caution
619 F. Supp. 1111·1985 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14394
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 29, 1985Civ.S-83-287 RARCalifornia9,158 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ramirez, J.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

The above-entitled matter came on specially for hearing by way of the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment on August 8, 1984. John G. Donhoff, Esq., appeared as counsel for the plaintiff, BARRY KEENE, and David J. Anderson, Esq., United States Department of Justice, appeared as counsel for the defendants, EDWIN MEESE, et al. Having read and considered the briefs and arguments presented by respective counsel, the Court herein renders its decision on the various motions.

PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The present action challenges the constitutionality of the Foreign Agents Registration Act, 22 U.S.C. § 611 (j)(l), which employs “political propaganda” as a term of art to describe every sort of communicative or expressive medium intended or reasonably adapted to influence persons within the United States with respect to the foreign or domestic policies of a foreign government, the foreign policies of the United States, or certain divisive domestic policies of the United States. Specifically, the plaintiff asserts that the use of the phrase “political propaganda” to describe the materials subject to the Act so…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.