If they "broke the law," can you show us when and where they were charged and convicted in a criminal court? What fine was levied by the court? Have they been sentenced in any way? If you can't prove these things, then I suggest you refrain from presenting your opinion as a statement of fact.
The current suit is a civil suit. Anyone can sue anyone for anything. It's interesting that the suit was brought by "Boston-based Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders." Here's what they have to say about the case:
Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders - GLAD Cases
(scroll down to near bottom of the page)
"Netherland et al. v. Whiteman et al. (Massachusetts)
CASE PENDING
GLAD is putting the right-wing on notice that they cannot use intimidation tactics to try to stop vitally important sex education information from getting to young people. In violation of Massachusetts wiretapping and privacy laws, Scott Whiteman, Brian Camenker, and the right-wing organization Parents Rights Coalition publicly distributed a tape recording of a sexuality and HIV/AIDS prevention education workshop conducted in March, 2000 at a conference sponsored by GLSEN. GLAD filed suit in Massachusetts Superior Court on behalf of Julie Netherland, a former employee of the Department of Education, and obtained a temporary restraining order (later converted to a preliminary injunction) to stop the defendants from further distributing the tape recording. After a lengthy discovery period, GLAD filed a motion for summary judgment, which is now pending."
Vitally important sex education information?! Here's what Education Commissioner David P. Driscoll said at the time:
State condemns 'gay' sex discussion
"Faced with the irrefutable evidence of his employees' actions, David Driscoll, commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Education, admitted Tuesday: "The participation of our staff in conversations with students about explicit issues of sexuality outside the realm of AIDS/HIV prevention was wrong. The workshops were of prurient nature, and not educational, and what we heard suggests that the discussion contributed absolutely nothing to the students' understanding of how to avoid AIDS and HIV."
Once again:
(Remember M.G.L Chapter 272: Sections 28, 29, and 31?)
From the article:
"The Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders did not return calls for comment.
If they have such a strong case against Camenker and Whiteman, why do they refuse to comment?