Give me a break. If this is so, that also means telemarketers and the junk mail folks are also. (Thank Cecil, one of my students if you see him…he has now proven that there are people who have never been on the internet.)
The court unanimously agreed with Jeremy Jaynes’ argument that the law violates the free-speech protections of the First Amendment because it does not just restrict commercial e-mails. -Evidently that’s what a Virginia court is saying. (Does the Judge have email???)
http://www.insidetech.com/news/3106-virginia-court-strikes-down-anti-spam-law
TCAT Shelbyville - ITIM 
I think what this article is saying is that the law was overturned by the poor wording of what it restricts and what it doesn’t. If it specified that it only restricted commercial emails it would have stood fine. Yeah, religious and political spam would still get through but to be honest, I don’t even see spam anymore really. I use Gmail for my primary email accounts and it does a pretty good job of keeping the junk out.
For me, if the law was changed to restrict only commercial emails, the rest of the spam could be taken care of by other means. Server-based filters and bayesian filtering would do a pretty good job of eliminating that from inboxes. Yeah, it sucks that we have to put up with it at all, but I’m a strong proponent of the Constitution, for better or worse.