ARE 18January 10, 2011Homework 11.6. In the case, Vincenty v. Bloomberg, Vincenty argues that the state of New York violated their right to freedom of speech among other things when they passed the law banning the sale of aerosol spray-paint cans and broad tipped indelible markers to persons under the age of twenty one years old and prohibited them from possessing such items on property other than their own. Vincenty sewed and went to federal court in hopes to get the law reversed. The question asked was, should it be? The law should be overturned because it violated peoples freedom of speech as well as their equal protection rights. For some people, spray paint was used as a way of expressing themselves, and not being able to buy it or even walk with it took that freedom away. The law also violated the equal protection clause because it treated individuals differently by allowing some (those over 21) to purchase spray paint while other, younger individuals could not.
This is the end of the preview.
access the rest of the document.