On Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued its first decision to address whether a California man could be charged with cyberstalking, the crime that allows cyberstalkers to target and stalk people online.
The ruling is part of a larger battle between the U.S. government and internet companies over the issue.
The case involves Justin J. Gui, who used social media to share online images of the victims of domestic violence, and sent them to women he met through dating apps.
Guim had accused the women of stalking him, and he argued that he should not be charged under California law because it does not criminalize stalking.
But a lower court judge ruled in January that Guim should be charged because the state criminalizes stalking, and the government appealed that ruling.
The Supreme Court declined to take up the case, which has become a litmus test for whether the federal government can challenge the constitutionality of California’s stalking law.
The justices are expected to decide whether the case will go to the U,S.
If the justices rule that Gui is protected under California’s law, it would make the first time the nation’s highest court has considered whether a state can criminalize cyberstalker behavior.
In the meantime, Guim, 34, is free to go about his day, and his attorney said he is planning to file a lawsuit challenging the case in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
He said his client is also considering taking legal action against the federal courts in California and the District of Columbia.
He noted that the U of C. is home to a national network of student centers that serve as safe havens for students and their families.
Guim’s case could become a test for a growing movement that seeks to end the legal protection of cyberstalks and other crimes against women, according to Jennifer St. Clair, a senior policy analyst at the advocacy group Women’s Rights Law Center, a partner at the firm Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck.
The law is designed to protect victims of cyber-stalking crimes, St. Claire said, and it’s a real-world example of how courts are treating the cyberstALKers’ legal rights.
If someone’s life is at risk and they can’t go into a legal process, what happens to the law?
“St. Clair said the court’s decision could mean that victims who have experienced cyberstrapings are protected in the courts and that courts will not be used as an “opportunity for a woman to get away with stalking.
“She said she hopes that will result in more women reporting cyberstabbing.