Resolved: Montgomery Cty, MD does not have the right to ban fortune-telling.

[Jackmannii]

@Anne_Neville

Assume the presence of fortune-tellers cuts down on unsolved crime in some measurable way. Would that change anybody’s opinion about whether fortune-telling should be legal or not?

I wouldn’t make the assumption without better evidence than that soothsayer’s say-so, and I’d also want evidence that such alleged crime-fighting overshadows the financial exploitation and outright fraud that accompanies the “profession” of fortune-telling.

By the way, references to a municipality “banning” fortune-telling sound about as illogical to me as claims that prayer is “banned” in schools. No one cares if you read palms or a crystal ball at a party. The question is whether you should be allowed to charge fees for the “service”.

I will lose no sleep whatsoever if poor Mr. Plaintiff gets stiffed by the courts and has to turn to some other means of supporting himself. Maybe a nice home improvement business? :dubious:

[ZPG_Zealot]

@Jackmannii

I will lose no sleep whatsoever if poor Mr. Plaintiff gets stiffed by the courts and has to turn to some other means of supporting himself. Maybe a nice home improvement business? :dubious:

Yeah, that’s really going cut down on Roma crime in the area. I hope you are being sarcastic. Even fortunetellers who regularly defraud clients are cheating people that go out of their way to volunteer for it. Home improvement scams do considerably more financial and environmental damage to a community.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@jtgain

IIRC, just because you call what you are doing a religion, doesn’t make it so. What if I wanted to sell marijuana in Montgomery County based on some religious belief that I have claiming that smoking marijuana makes you closer to God?

No. Rather, IIRC, the government can restrict practices immaterial of whether they’re religious practices, I believe; if they appear to be targeting a specifically religious practice, there must be compelling government interest in such targeting. There was a test case a decade or so ago involving Santeria animal sacrifices, and a township that outlawed animal slaughter as a way to stop the sacrifices. The Santeria practitioners won.

This may apply to such a case, but I’m not sure how.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

This is the ACLU’s press release explaining why they’ve taken the case. Material to the SC court above is this passage:

@ACLU

n defending the law in the Circuit Court, the County argued that it is a legitimate exercise of police power, aimed at preventing fraud. While the interest in preventing fraud is legitimate, the County already has a law accomplishing that goal. A separate provision of the County Code prohibits persons from intending to or engaging in fraud in any consumer transaction. Accordingly, the ban’s only effect is to prevent individuals from engaging in constitutionally protected activity.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

The more I think about it, the more I’m starting to come around to the conclusion that, while the “psychic” industry is 100% fraud and hokum, legislating against it is pretty messy for any number of reasons. It’s probably defensible on First Amendment grounds. These scammers are probably better fought with information and exposure.

[Ravenman]

In the last day or two, I’ve found a number of court cases that clearly side with the fortune teller. I, too, have come to the conclusion that the law is on his side.

But as far as the “…I will defend to my death his right to say it,” fuck that. I hope his nefarious business fails and he suffers tenfold the wrong he does to “customers.”