thehill.com
Free speech hangs in the balance in 3 Supreme Court cases
Liberal justices long acted as the bulwark for free speech on the court. They are now viewed as the weakest link.
the demrats in DC trying set up a one party system with little and ineffective political opposition.
Dude, that's an Op/Ed from Turley, a faux niwz shill and total sell out who is pushing a book.Free speech hangs in the balance in 3 Supreme Court cases
Liberal justices long acted as the bulwark for free speech on the court. They are now viewed as the weakest link.
the demrats in DC trying set up a one party system with little and ineffective political opposition.
Go ahead and look the other way that is what you do best.
The linked article is a lie – riddled with false statements and disinformation.Free speech hangs in the balance in 3 Supreme Court cases
Liberal justices long acted as the bulwark for free speech on the court. They are now viewed as the weakest link.
the demrats in DC trying set up a one party system with little and ineffective political opposition.
Wrong, then again you usually are. The left wants little or weak political opposition and are using the federal government as their political hammer.
With regard to Murthy v. Missouri, government notifying social media entities about disinformation campaigns is neither ‘coercion’ nor does it violate the First Amendment.
In your dreams maybe, its nothing more than the fed being political muscle for the left.
Yeah sure, tell that to the dozens of speakers chased, harassed, and even assaulted by whiny liberals across the country. Your cancel culture is all about silencing anything you don't want to hear.
An interesting topic, but the op ed link ruined the thread. The justices questioning in the social media cases was interesting, and illuminating in that Alito does seem to live in a bubbleFree speech hangs in the balance in 3 Supreme Court cases
Liberal justices long acted as the bulwark for free speech on the court. They are now viewed as the weakest link.
the demrats in DC trying set up a one party system with little and ineffective political opposition.
If Trump is president and says “Alex Acosta is a terrible journalist and he should be fired because his articles are all terrible”, would that be a first amendment violation?Free speech hangs in the balance in 3 Supreme Court cases
Liberal justices long acted as the bulwark for free speech on the court. They are now viewed as the weakest link.
the demrats in DC trying set up a one party system with little and ineffective political opposition.
No, that's an opinion.
No man has put up with the accusations, attacks, viciousness and smears than Donald Trump. our entertainment industry is weaponized against Republicans as it is. Conservatism is not on the table yet. Populism is and that is only a name for reigning in the excesses of all of the Progressive Socialist Agendas that are really destroying us. Carville told you the reason the other day. It is real and if we do not change somewhat that will end with primal thinking taking over for surviving.
How is that different than the FBI telling Facebook they think a poster is spreading disinformation?
The FBI wasn't voicing their opinions, they received 'reports' from third party 'researchers' and then using the full force of the government 'asked' private industries to censor the citizens. Such blatant corruption and abuse of power can also be found in third world countries. Is that the real reason for open borders? Flood the country with illiterate peasants who won't question abuses?
What do you mean by “using the full force of the government”?
The full force of the government is the implied threat in the powers they have. It's the expectation that there are negative consequences for refusing their 'advice'. Nobody believes the government asks, they demand.
Couldn’t you say there were implied threats from Trump talking about firing journalists?
No, Trump does not have authority to have 'journalists' fired. He didn't even have any excluded from the press corps or in fact take any type of punitive action.
FBI doesn’t have the authority to kick anyone off social media either.
