The Biden administration asked the Supreme Court Thursday to stay a 5th Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruling on its communication with social media companies, calling it “startling,” “novel and disruptive” and a “radical extension” of current doctrine.
a far-right “news” site known for publishing conspiracy theories, hoaxes and misinformation.
Fine with me if a fat guy in his bedroom wants to produce a website saying the Twin Towers fell down all by themselves. You just can’t label it news or true or real. It’s entertainment for profit.
As Nancy Reagan put it, “Just say so.”
The platforms themselves are not government-controlled, so if they choose to flag content, that’s not a first amendment issue (plus flagging content is distinct from censoring). If the government could be shown to be “coercing” the platforms to flag the content, it could be an issue (not sure about a first amendment issue), but it doesn’t sound like there is any evidence for that happening.
The first amendment is intended to preclude the government from actively silencing free speech, but it doesn’t guarantee speech without any push-back. You can’t just spout any nonsense you want and expect people to be fine with it. They have their own first amendment rights to call you out if you’re spewing bullshit. And that includes the platforms (with advice from government offices like the CDC) challenging harmful medical misinformation if you try to spread it on their network.
The fundamental argument in this decision is that the government shouldn’t be allowed to correct lies in the public sphere with facts. That’s what the right wingers really want, to spread their lies without any pushback or consequences from those that know they are lies. The fact that judges are going along with this is astounding…facts really should matter to judges, but these ones only care about their political beliefs.
Sadly, the same is true of some Supreme Court justices…
If the government does correct lies, it will hurt the feelings of the liars. Which is total equivalent to being waterboarded while being burned at the stake. Hence impermissible government action.
Also, of course, the government has no compelling interest in saving the lives of its citizens.
(yeah /s is probably necessary these days)
Still, Judges Don Willett, Edith Brown Clement and Jennifer Walker Elrod— all appointed by Republican presidents accused the government of being over-the-top in its concern about the dangers certain social media posts could pose.
WTF??? Jan. 6th, anyone???
So the Fifth Circuit will stifle the free speech rights of the FBI, White House, Surgeon General and CDC if they exercise their constitutional rights to point out the lies issued by far right wing nut jobs. Makes me think the Fifth Circuit and the pipeline that feeds it want to censor, shadow-ban or otherwise throttle the voice of their opposition.
Didn’t Mitt suggest that corporations are people with full constitutional rights? Isn’t the wet dream of all Republicans to run the government like a corporation? Should not the Government, then, have just as much protection under the 1st Amendment as any other private citizen or corporation?
It’s the GQP ideology in action.
When logic and proportion
Have fallen sloppy dead (h/t to Grace Slick)
Of course, if you’re being burned at the stake, a little waterboarding might provide some welcome relief from the heat.
Is the Government allowed under the US Constitution to speak to the public interest?
The 5th Circuit says No.
On average you would be perfectly healthy.
Damn, It would have worked too, if not for those nosy kids.
Great point.
As I heard it back in the day, the government was all set to apply restrictions to movies and tv programs. The industry came up with the rating system – G, PG, R and X – and, I believe, established an independent agency to apply the appropriate rating depending upon content.
The challenge is scaling a solution to 7 billion content producers, who can form practical networks larger than broadcast networks.
Well, maybe they don’t have Internet in the Sahara… 7 billion minus one.
Recently the Alabama legislature told SCROTUS to take a flying f*** and guess what? NOTHING HAPPENED. The SCROTUS police did not descend on the legislature and arrest the miscreants. Not a single member of the legislature suffered any penalty or public opprobrium. Democrats need to take that lesson to heart.
Or pushing ivermectin??? I seem to remember that their advice poisoned a few people, literally.
So let Hunter get his fair trial and maybe pay a fine if convicted. Nobody is or should be in the tank for Hunter Biden.
As somebody has already posted, the Alabama legislature is doing exactly what Kavanaugh told them to do in his concurring opinion in Allen v. Milligan.
“The question now is simply whether Kavanaugh wants to kill the Voting Rights Act with this argument, in a case where the state is in open revolt against a court order, or does he want to wait until some other state does the exact same thing without the stench of having previously lost the argument.”
Is the public permitted to have the advice of their elected government on matters of broad public importance that are a legitimate concern of the government, as implied in the Constitution?
Some reactionaries in Texas and Louisiana say No.
