from www.publishersweekly.com – First Amendment advocates were generally encouraged by Tuesday’s oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court in U.S. v Stevens.

The case, which many First Amendment supporters have called the most important free speech case in 25 years, involves the conviction of Robert Stevens for selling a dog-fighting video that a federal court found violated a 1999 law that makes it’s a crime to create, sell or possess videos and other depictions of cruelty to animals.

The original intent of the law was to prevent the sale so-called “crush videos.” Stevens conviction was overturned, but the U.S. Justice Department appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court.

David Horowtiz, executive director of the Media Coalition and who was at the hearing, said the tone of the arguments made him “cautiously optimistic” that the court would uphold the appeals court decision that the law was unconstitutional. He said the justices seemed skeptical about the breath of the law.

In its amicus brief, the Media Coalition argued that the law was in fact overbroad and would criminalize material that was protected by the First Amendment. Horowitz pointed to the example given by the appeals court in overturning Stevens’ conviction about how the law could be wrongly applied. “If a person hunts or fishes out of season, films the activity and sells it to an out-of-state party, it appears that the statute has been violated,” the court said.

While the Media Coalition would like to see the law found unconstitutional, there is a chance that the Supreme Court could find a way to limit the scope of the law without completely throwing out the law.