Can anyone explain to me why the Rave Act isn't in violation of the First Amendment? If it is, who will challenge it?

When we've got 1,700 page opinions about McCain-Feingold, more unconstitutional legislation is not a surprise. I'm a strong supporter of the President, but he's got to start vetoing these things. The courts shouldn't be forced to pass on the constitutionality of legislation in clear conflict with the plain language of the Bill of Rights.

Unfortunately this will have to be challenged AFTER the fact. Only after someone has been convicted and charged and we follow the appeals process will this go away.

I'm associated with a large anime (Japanese animation) convention on the East Coast. One of the events in our "con" is a dance. We know that people deal in various "dance-scene" drugs at our dance, and we do what we can to suppress it. But no doubt some enterprising law-enforcement type, out to make a name for himself or to impress his superiors, will use our event to highlight the dangers of raves, and screw our (non-profit, educational) corporation in the name of suppressing the unorthodox.

If I remember correctly, the RAVE act was attached to the conference agreement to the Defense Authorization bill, which is as much of a must-pass bill as they come on Capitol Hill. Like most members of Congress and staff (like myself), who didn't even know that provision was included at the last minute and didn't make it into any of the summaries of the bill, its quite possible that the President didn't even know it was there, or if he did, his advisors told him that it was a minor technical correction to drug laws blah, blah, blah.