9 Comments on Don’t take the law into your own hands, you take ‘em to court!
I wish him luck but MY understanding is that only CONgress is restricted from violating ones first amendment rights.
7
@𝓒𝓻𝓪𝓬𝓴𝓮𝓻FJB𝓫𝓪𝓫𝔂
The 14th Amendment projects those free speech protections to the purview of both state and local governments as well as Congress, thus prohibiting ALL government interference with free speech rights.
But social media platforms are privately owned and operated, and they are free to limit the content on their sites without implicating the First Amendment. So this is going to be a tough sell.
However, the free speech issue is salient wrt some of the other sueable offenses, specifically breach of contract, and Federal false advertising and unfair competition.
By editing (banning) content, SocMedia cos become publishers.
14
If Twitter’s defense is that they are not a public forum and can’t be held accountable for violating First Amendment rights, then they open themselves up to civil liability for damages caused by being a publisher. They can’t have it both ways.
7
But the gov’t can tell private corporations who they can hire?
Who they can fire? What “color” ratios are acceptable? What wattage light bulbs to sell? How much water a water closet can use? How much water a shower head can eject over a certain period? Who a restaurant must serve? For whom to bake a cake? What may be written on said cake?
If it serves the public, regardless of who owns it, it cannot discriminate on the basis of sex, perversion, height, weight, hair color, skin tone, religion, disability, or scientific views.
Twitter, facebook, and all that other shit serve the public – they are afforded no more protections from the law than any other corporation which serves the public.
Before we pile on, I know the law is a cudgel, wielded by the rich and powerful to beat those who are not rich and powerful into submission.
mortem tyrannis
izlamo delenda est …
5
Take a play from the anti gunners playbook and subject them to “death by a thousand cuts”.
Considering the current environment in the U.S. of Fascistic collusion happily existing between Gvt and Big Tech (not to mention large corporations), a case can and must be made that they are effectively agents of government overreach and abuse. These “private” parties are doing the will of Gvt achieve Gvt actors agendas, convoluted to bypass appropriate Constitutional safeguard. All under the aegis of an erroneous and highly manufactured idea of being non-governmental. That veil has been torn asunder. It is well past time for Lady Justice to limber up that dulled sword and put it to work!
IATS
TWD
4
Corporations are licensed by the government, and therefore are de facto agents of government. If they, as some posters claim, can’t be held to the First Amendment’s limits, then they are not subject to any others…say the 13th. Consistency is the backbone of law.
1
@Rich Taylor December 21, 2021 at 5:30 pm
> But social media platforms are privately owned and operated
@Rich, you ignorant slut.
(I know. I know. Just a professional liar. “Ignorant slut” is the most euphemistic I could come up with, in the time allotted.)
Corporations (and all their six of one, half a dozen of the same, fake entities) are all created by the government. At the government’s pleasure. Existing as long as the government allows. Subject to absolute government control. Up to, and including, dissolution. At the government’s pleasure. They are as different from the DMV, as the DMV is from the EPA. As the EPA is from the FBI.
@Tim – FJB December 21, 2021 at 7:02 pm
> But the gov’t can tell private corporations
For this, very, reason. There are no “private” government bureaus. Only the ones the government hides behind.
I wish him luck but MY understanding is that only CONgress is restricted from violating ones first amendment rights.
@𝓒𝓻𝓪𝓬𝓴𝓮𝓻FJB𝓫𝓪𝓫𝔂
The 14th Amendment projects those free speech protections to the purview of both state and local governments as well as Congress, thus prohibiting ALL government interference with free speech rights.
But social media platforms are privately owned and operated, and they are free to limit the content on their sites without implicating the First Amendment. So this is going to be a tough sell.
However, the free speech issue is salient wrt some of the other sueable offenses, specifically breach of contract, and Federal false advertising and unfair competition.
By editing (banning) content, SocMedia cos become publishers.
If Twitter’s defense is that they are not a public forum and can’t be held accountable for violating First Amendment rights, then they open themselves up to civil liability for damages caused by being a publisher. They can’t have it both ways.
But the gov’t can tell private corporations who they can hire?
Who they can fire? What “color” ratios are acceptable? What wattage light bulbs to sell? How much water a water closet can use? How much water a shower head can eject over a certain period? Who a restaurant must serve? For whom to bake a cake? What may be written on said cake?
If it serves the public, regardless of who owns it, it cannot discriminate on the basis of sex, perversion, height, weight, hair color, skin tone, religion, disability, or scientific views.
Twitter, facebook, and all that other shit serve the public – they are afforded no more protections from the law than any other corporation which serves the public.
Before we pile on, I know the law is a cudgel, wielded by the rich and powerful to beat those who are not rich and powerful into submission.
mortem tyrannis
izlamo delenda est …
Take a play from the anti gunners playbook and subject them to “death by a thousand cuts”.
Considering the current environment in the U.S. of Fascistic collusion happily existing between Gvt and Big Tech (not to mention large corporations), a case can and must be made that they are effectively agents of government overreach and abuse. These “private” parties are doing the will of Gvt achieve Gvt actors agendas, convoluted to bypass appropriate Constitutional safeguard. All under the aegis of an erroneous and highly manufactured idea of being non-governmental. That veil has been torn asunder. It is well past time for Lady Justice to limber up that dulled sword and put it to work!
IATS
TWD
Corporations are licensed by the government, and therefore are de facto agents of government. If they, as some posters claim, can’t be held to the First Amendment’s limits, then they are not subject to any others…say the 13th. Consistency is the backbone of law.
@Rich Taylor December 21, 2021 at 5:30 pm
> But social media platforms are privately owned and operated
@Rich, you ignorant slut.
(I know. I know. Just a professional liar. “Ignorant slut” is the most euphemistic I could come up with, in the time allotted.)
Corporations (and all their six of one, half a dozen of the same, fake entities) are all created by the government. At the government’s pleasure. Existing as long as the government allows. Subject to absolute government control. Up to, and including, dissolution. At the government’s pleasure. They are as different from the DMV, as the DMV is from the EPA. As the EPA is from the FBI.
@Tim – FJB December 21, 2021 at 7:02 pm
> But the gov’t can tell private corporations
For this, very, reason. There are no “private” government bureaus. Only the ones the government hides behind.