‘It’s the First Amendment, stupid’: Federal judge blasts DeSantis administration for threats against TV stations
‘It’s the First Amendment, stupid’: Federal judge blasts DeSantis administration for threats against TV stations
Chief U.S. District Judge Mark E. Walker granted a temporary restraining order against Florida’s surgeon general after the state health department threatened to bring criminal charges against broadcasters airing the ad.
Case file: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flnd.527759/gov.uscourts.flnd.527759.25.0.pdf
You're viewing a single thread.
The government cannot excuse its indirect censorship of political speech simply by declaring the disfavored speech is “false.”
For when all the liberals who whine about how conservatives are "allowed to lie!". In particular the ones taking the side of the Brazilian government against musk.
Freedom cuts both ways. It needs to. You have to put up with speech you hate in order to have your own freedom to say what you want.
In particular the ones taking the side of the Brazilian government against musk.
Brazil doesn't have USA's First Amendment. So no matter which stance people have on what it should be, it was legally valid.
And the whole fight was a political farce as Musk personally is known to comply with government censorship. Again, you can argue that the law is wrong and should be changed, but it's legally valid.
Brazil doesn’t have USA’s First Amendment. So no matter which stance people have on what it should be, it was legally valid.
I'm arguing "should" not "can". It's just another case of when libs will gladly dispose of their values when it suits their short-term goals.
What would a liberal who doesn't dispose of their values look like in this situation?
I do mean this question sincerely, if possible please try to avoid the easy non-answer of "That doesn't exist hahahahahahahahah".
"Persecution for the expression of opinions seems to me perfectly logical. If you have no doubt of your premises or your power, and want a certain result with all your heart, you naturally express your wishes in law, and sweep away all opposition... But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas — that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrams_v._United_States#Holmes's_dissent
Except you can't threaten a president or lie about a corporation without being sued.
However, the right to incite racial violence is very much protected
Funny that huh?
Except you can’t threaten a president
Or anybody else if it's a "true threat"
or lie about a corporation without being sued.
Or anybody else. And this is a civil tort not a criminal offense.
Yeah, so, like I said, not so free after all, depsite the claims to the contrary.
Well, unless its the right to incite racial hatred and violence. Then you're free as a bird.
I'm sure its just a coincidence and doesn't cross reference with anything else from Americas history.
I have no idea what your point is. Do you have an argument that isn't petty whining and vague hints at something nefarious? Because whiny "I'm sure it's just a coincidence..." arguments simply aren't worth engaging with.
If you say so, I agree, you have no idea what is being said to you. Maybe its because you're too smart to understand.
Maybe that's a thing.
This is true, and the 2nd Amendment exists for when they start saying Nazi shit.
Lets just ignore all the laws against murder. But seriously if you're at the point where you're willing to kill people over what they say then you're a danger to us all.
This guy's a Nazi sympathizer who thinks everyone says Nazi shit sometimes.
Okay. Bye. 🙄