When we covered the recent Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that upheld a law barring social media platforms from censoring primarily conservative speech, I noted that the decision was even more likely to wind up in front of the Supreme Court. That was because the 11th Circuit reached the opposite conclusion in May of 2022 in the case of NetChoice v. Moody. This split between the circuit courts will make it difficult for the Supreme Court to justify refusing the appeal. This week at the Federalist, Margot Cleveland provides a lengthy and in-depth look at the previous cases that have been cited as precedent in this debate and how the Supremes might interpret the differences. The courts have repeatedly considered issues of censorship by private sector actors and their decisions always seem to come down to a question of who is either doing the speaking or being suppressed in their efforts to bring their views to the public.
At issue will be whether or not the USSC decides that Facebook and Twitter are the "speakers" on their platform, or if they are the "hosts" of other speakers. Both of these options are uncomfortable legally to the social media giants.
If social media argues that they are the "speakers" then they are entitled (as the speaker) to have a say as to what is published on their platform. They would win the argument on whether they are allowed to censor and control speech, and would only be following their own first amendment rights to free speech.
However, social media has argued in the past that they are just "hosts" of other people's views and therefore cannot be held liable for things that are said. They are legally "defined" as a public platform under Section 230 which provides immunity to platforms that are considered open forums. As many have argued, if Facebook and Twitter want to be publishers and control the content, then they lose their immunity under 230.
If they want to stick to their guns on section 230 and argue that they are just a public platform, then it is the user who is the speaker and social media is just the host. As host they are no longer the speaker entitled to have a say on what is published. They would not (at that point) have claims to first amendment rights to be the "speaker" and "censor" opinions under the guise of first amendment rights. The first amendment rights would be enjoyed by the "speakers" and not the host.
Facebook and Twitter (and many Democrats) would like the platforms to have both. They would like them to have a say as "speakers" while still enjoying the protection of being "hosts". Legally, they really cannot be both. At least that is what many (probably most) expect the USSC to clarify as the reality.
40 comments:
Clarence Thomas has the right idea. Treat FB, Twitter, etc. as "common carriers. Think Bell System (phone companies).
Thomas: Online platforms are like common carriers
In addition to his First Amendment argument, Thomas wrote that digital platforms could be regulated as common carriers. "In many ways, digital platforms that hold themselves out to the public resemble traditional common carriers," he wrote. "Though digital instead of physical, they are at bottom communications networks, and they 'carry' information from one user to another. A traditional telephone company laid physical wires to create a network connecting people. Digital platforms lay information infrastructure that can be controlled in much the same way."
The similarity between online platforms and common carriers "is even clearer for digital platforms that have dominant market share," such as Facebook, Google, and Amazon, Thomas continued.
"The Facebook suite of apps is valuable largely because 3 billion people use it," he wrote. "Google search—at 90 percent of the market share—is valuable relative to other search engines because more people use it, creating data that Google's algorithm uses to refine and improve search results. These network effects entrench these companies." Thomas wrote that "Although both companies are public, one person controls Facebook (Mark Zuckerberg), and just two control Google (Larry Page and Sergey Brin)."
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/04/clarence-thomas-blasts-section-230-wants-common-carrier-rules-on-twitter/
He's right. What's happening today is akin to allowing the phone company back in the day to deliver some calls and not others.
What is very troubling is that the Biden administration is stocked with personnel that came from big tech (and others) and are holding regular meetings (see Alex Berenson https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/the-white-house-privately-demanded ) with their old companies to censor, deplatform and throttle their political opponents
Banana Republic
1984
This judge will put the former president in jail next in November
Dearie has until November 30 to finish reviewing the documents seized by the FBI. During its raid of Mar-a-Lago, the agency seized 11 sets of classified documents, including some marked "top secret." The DOJ is looking into whether Trump broke any of three federal laws — including the Espionage Act — by keeping the documents at his Florida residence.
I had to let Roger's latest (of about 20 comments in the past few hours) past moderation.
Apparently Roger is under the impression that the special master is going to throw Trump in jail? Deary (the special master) is simply there to oversee the DOJ and make sure that they did not seize more documents from Trump that they should not have (on top of the 500 or so they admitted to) and will be looking through the "classified" documents that the DOJ is hoarding as well.
He makes no decisions on criminal charges and is actually in place by the request of the Trump legal team... not the DOJ?
Both the Reverend and Roger seem very confused by all of this, suggesting (or repeating suggestions) that the hearing that Deary requested is bad for Trump.
Rather... in reality it is horribly bad for the DOJ that Deary is acting now in spite of the DOJ filing an appeal to undermine his authority as special master.
I am wondering which people are gaslighting these two?
Go to the next thread down and do some informed studying of what I just put there, Ch.
And carefuly read, as I am now carefully reading, the two links Goddard provided.
Apparently Roger is under the impression that the special master is going to throw Trump in jail?
Well, the alky IS an imbecile as well as being mentally ill, so I can see why he would think that a special master has the power to imprison someone.
Hate to tell you this, rrb,
but facts of law can imprison people.
KansasDem
"Apparently Roger is under the impression that the special master is going to throw Trump in jail?"
It is kind of you to allow us to again enjoy the Spectacular Stupidity of Roger.
Hate to tell you this, rrb,
but facts of law can imprison people.
So you agree with Roger that Dearie is going to throw Trump into jail?
A simple yes or not will suffice.
The ONLY downside of Trump's argument is whether or not the Special Master decides not to review the 100 classified documents in question.
Which would mean that he would only review those deemed not classified.
However, if the 11 circuit comes back in favor of Trump and Cannon - then I would suspect that Dearie would be inclined to go through those documents regardless of the arguments he was presented.
Ch, you are not stupid are you?
When I say facts of law can throw people in jail I am not saying Drearie will throw Trump in jail, but in the working out of this entire matter, facts of law very well may, ultimately.
Blogger Honest, decent, truthful Rev. said...
Hate to tell you this, rrb,
but facts of law can imprison people.
No shit, pederast. But that wasn't the claim, you dishonest piece of shit.
This was -
Blogger Coldheartedtruth Teller said...
This judge will put the former president in jail next in November
Dearie has until November 30 to finish reviewing the documents seized by the FBI.
Meanwhile, DeSantis is sending another plane load of beaners, this time directly to Biden's backyard:
First Martha's Vineyard, now Joe's backyard! Delaware readies for surprise influx of migrants after plane used by DeSantis to drop Venezuelans in Martha's Vineyard prepares to touch down
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11230851/DeSantis-plane-used-send-50-migrants-Marthas-Vineyard-heading-Bidens-beach-home.html
from Politico
LEGAL
Special master to Trump’s lawyers: ‘You can't have your cake and eat it too’
Judge Raymond Dearie pushed Trump’s lawyers repeatedly for refusing to back up the former president’s claim that he declassified the highly sensitive national security-related records discovered in his residence.
By JOSH GERSTEIN and KYLE CHENEY
09/20/2022 03:05 PM EDT
Updated: 09/20/2022 03:29 PM EDT
NEW YORK — The senior federal judge tasked with reviewing the materials seized by the FBI from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate sharply questioned the former president’s attorneys Tuesday during their first hearing before his courtroom.
Judge Raymond Dearie pushed Trump’s lawyers repeatedly for refusing to back up the former president’s claim that he declassified the highly sensitive national security-related records discovered in his residence.
“You can’t have your cake and eat it,” said Dearie, the “special master” picked by U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon to vet Trump’s effort to reclaim the materials taken by federal investigators.
Trump has argued that the 11,000 documents taken from Mar-a-Lago were rightfully in his possession, including about 100 bearing classification markings that suggest they contain some of the nation’s most closely guarded intelligence.
But Dearie bristled at the effort by Trump’s lawyers to resist his request for proof that Trump actually attempted to declassify any of the 100 documents that the Justice Department recovered from his estate. Without evidence from Trump, Dearie said his only basis to judge the classification level of the records was the fact that they all bear markings designating them as highly sensitive national security secrets — including some that indicate they contain intelligence derived from human sources and foreign intercepts.
continued --
The early tension between Dearie and Trump’s legal team was an ominous sign for the former president, who demanded the special master review the documents taken from Mar-a-Lago and who proposed Dearie — a 1986 appointee of Ronald Reagan — to perform the task. Prosecutors had offered two other names, but acceded to Trump’s choice of Dearie.
Trump’s legal team entered the Brooklyn courthouse about a half hour before the hearing, braving jeers from a smattering of protesters, including one shouting, “Indict Trump!”
A more subdued atmosphere prevailed inside Dearie’s courtroom. Members of the press were seated in the jury box, prompting one of Trump’s attorneys to joke before the session got underway that the former president’s team had not agreed to this set of jurors.
Dearie, 78, engaged succinctly with the parties during the 40-minute session. He noted that the current litigation filed by Trump is civil in nature, since no criminal charges have been filed, so the burden of proof is on Trump to back up any assertion of privilege or other protected interest in the documents.
Trump’s lawyers asked Dearie to set in motion the process of getting security clearances so they can review the allegedly classified documents.
But prosecutor Julie Edelstein told the judge that some of the records involved are so sensitive that members of the government’s investigative team still haven’t been approved to the documents.
continued --
Whether any of the records seized from Trump’s home are classified may ultimately be a side issue. The Justice Department has emphasized that the three potential crimes it is investigating don’t hinge on whether the material held at Mar-a-Lago was classified.
Still, Dearie’s comments on classification of the records were particularly notable in light of a separate court filing by Trump, who is urging a federal appeals court to keep in place Cannon’s order blocking the Justice Department from advancing its criminal investigation into the seized records.
In that filing, Trump’s attorneys argued that it was the Justice Department — not Trump — that bore the burden of showing the documents seized last month were classified. Dearie rejected that argument in his courtroom, saying that all that mattered were the markings on the documents.
article ends
The Justice Department has emphasized that the three potential crimes it is investigating don’t hinge on whether the material held at Mar-a-Lago was classified.
They don't?
Excellent.
Then charge him. TODAY. Let's go.
For chrissakes, is there even ONE critical thinker left in the MSM anymore?
GOP Lawmaker Called Trump the ‘Orange Jesus’
September 20, 2022 at 3:50 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard
you know that is the next bit of "wisdom" the "pastor" will bring here
Another James Hodgkinson, and away we go -
Forty-one-year-old Shannon Brandt said he was afraid 18-year-old Cayler Ellingson was “part of a Republican extremist group and that he was afraid they were ‘coming to get him.'”
So he allegedly killed Ellingson with his car.
Court documents say at 2:35 Sunday morning, 41-year-old Shannon Brandt called 911 to report that he had hit a pedestrian because he was threatening him. Brandt told State Radio that the pedestrian was part of a Republican extremist group and that he was afraid they were “coming to get him.” The pedestrian has been identified in a GoFundMe page as 18-year-old Cayler Ellingson.
https://www.valleynewslive.com/2022/09/19/man-admits-killing-teen-after-political-dispute-foster-co/
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/09/20/nolte-man-admits-killing-teen-member-of-republican-extremist-group/
Let's hear some intelligent commentary, pro or con, on the Politico article above.
Well Reverend...
You seem incapable of not cutting and pasting from Goddard all day long and desperately trying to change
EVERY
FUCKING
THREAD
INTO
TRUMP
Perhaps letting you past moderation was a failed experiment.
You
just
cannot
help
yourself
Perhaps letting you past moderation was a failed experiment.
BIGLY.
30 days in the legacy hospice blog penalty box seems to be in order.
He can give the alky a virtual reach-around.
Here we go again. James trying to set the debate agenda with his copy pastes. I suggest he stick to the topics out host chooses. Or else go to the legacy blog.
Just a complete lack of self-control...
A disease really.
An obsession that apparently cannot be quenched with any amount of cutting and pasting. Like a newborn vampire who needs blood 24/7 or they go into a rage... the Reverend and Roger need to be talking Trump 24/7 or they do the same.
It would be amusing if it wasn't so sad.
More to the point, there is a fringe portion of our population (CNN has realized that it is not enough people to even survive on however) that live for anything Trump.
Bad orange man haunts them in their sleep and they cannot understand why others do not have the same nightmares.
Blogger C.H. Truth said...
Just a complete lack of self-control...
A disease really.
An obsession that apparently cannot be quenched with any amount of cutting and pasting. Like a newborn vampire who needs blood 24/7 or they go into a rage... the Reverend and Roger need to be talking Trump 24/7 or they do the same.
Like the folks on Martha's Vineyard who rid themselves of the illegals...
...throw him the fuck OUT.
Trump
is
trying
to
turn
every f'ing
thing
into
Trump.
But you guys could still make intelligent comments on the Politico article, if any of you are capable of doing that.
It is, after all, THE major news event of today.
(I will now go silent for a while to wait and see what you say.)
Like the folks on Martha's Vineyard who rid themselves of the illegals...
...throw him the fuck OUT.
Did he ever produce that brochure he claimed was given to them ?
or did he move on to the next hoax
it's all he ever does, produce a hoax, demand answers and move on to the next hoax.
what a "pastor"
But you guys could still make intelligent comments on the Politico article, if any of you are capable of doing that.
It is, after all, THE major news event of today.
CNN
TRENDING: Adnan Syed
Hurricane Fiona
Adam Levine
Ants on Earth
Gap layoffs
Chess controversy
'Dancing with the Stars'
PODCAST: Chasing Life
DOJ charges 47 people with stealing $250 million from pandemic program
MINNEAPOLIS, MN. - SEPTEMBER 2022: U.S. Attorney Andrew Luger(at the podium) announced a significant COVID-related fraud case based in Minnesota, Tuesday, September 20, 2022 Minneapolis, Minn. The director of the Twin Cities-based Feeding Our Future nonprofit and 46 other people have been charged in what federal prosecutors say was a "massive scheme" to defraud the government of more than $250 million meant to feed needy children during the COVID-19 pandemic. In a news conference in Minneapolis on Tuesday, U.S. Attorney Andrew Luger described it as the largest pandemic fraud in the country, and the charges amount to one of the largest federal fraud cases ever brought in Minnesota. Six indictments were unsealed Tuesday that describe alleged crimes including wire fraud conspiracy, money laundering and bribery. Standing behind Luger are, left to right, Associate Deputy Attorney General Director of Covid-19 Fraud Enforcement for the Department of Justice Kevin Chambers, United States Postal Inspection Service Inspector in Charge Ruth Mendonca, IRS Special Agent in Charge Justin Campbell and FBI Special Agent in Charge Michael Paul. (Photo by Glen Stubbe/Star Tribune via Getty Images)
Defendants allegedly used money taken from the program to buy luxury cars and homes. It's the largest Covid-related fraud uncovered to date.
Analysis: Biden declares the pandemic over. And people are acting like it, too
Biden's comments about pandemic widen public health split
CDC moves 3 tropical island getaways to 'moderate' risk
See how one doctor is treating Covid-related brain fog
Opinion: Pandemic or not, the coronavirus will still be with us
Gov. Ron DeSantis holds a news conference at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona Beach, Fla., Friday, Sept.16, 2022. (Nigel Cook/The Daytona Beach News-Journal via AP)
ANALYSIS
DeSantis' migrant flights point toward an ominous future of red and blue conflict
• Opinion: Why he chose Martha's Vineyard
• Delaware prepares for possible migrant arrivals
• Texas sheriff announces investigation into flight
A man walks through the ruins of a building destroyed by recent shelling during Russia-Ukraine conflict in the city of Kadiivka (Stakhanov) in the Luhansk region, Ukraine September 19, 2022.
LIVE UPDATES
Ukraine says it's striking areas in Luhansk where Russians are redeploying
• Live updates: UN General Assembly meets
• Video: Lawmaker predicts Putin's next step
• Opinion: Where Putin goes from here
Special master questions Trump claims about declassifying Mar-a-Lago docs
Exclusive: DHS rejects plan to protect election officials from harassment as midterms loom
Analysis: Ranking the 2024 Democratic field
These male politicians are pushing for women who receive abortions to be punished with prison time
________________________________________
even CNN doesn't agree with the "pastor"
But you guys could still make intelligent comments on the Politico article, if any of you are capable of doing that.
If I wanted to comment on something Trump related I would create a Trump related post or head on over to the Legacy blog where it is Trump pretty much every day...
I provided you with my comments and asked a question in a polite manner.
You just ignored it as you always do. Because at the end of the day you are not really interested in anyone else's opinion despite participating on a blog where it is about engaging with other opinions.
It is painfully clear that you have complete and total disrespect for anything "I" might state... only glossing past it, ignoring it, and bringing up your next cut and paste. Because whatever you have to say (or Goddard) is obviously much more important than what I might have to say...
Even as you pretend to engage or offer debate.
Perhaps letting you past moderation was a failed experiment.
Winner winner
Chicken dinner
Neither can help themselves, it’s really sad how obsessed they are with Bad Orange Man
After Ch accused me at 3:11 of being gaslit by someone, aand then naively saying the hearing is bad for the DOJ (when it's actually working out badly for Trump), Ch says he asked me a question which I did not answer.
I suppose he means the question he asked at 3:38 & 39, requesting a simple yes or not(sic) answer.
I thought and still think my answer at 3:44 is quite clear:
No, Drearie is NOT going to throw Trump in jail, but the facts of the case and the laws Trump disregarded very well MAY ultimately indict, convict, and throw him in jail.
That is just one more example of my having answered Ch when he was or is either too obtuse to see it, or too dishonest to admit it.
I will now point out that I presented a detailed and intelligent article at 3:48, 3:50, and 3:53 above and invited intelligent commentary on it, pro and con, to be made by anyone, while I remained silent.
Apparently I set the bar much too high for all of you, lol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFh0y6cd2Yw
some added good stuff
Sorry Reverend....
There is absolutely nothing "intelligent" or useful for you to cut and paste an article.
The fact that you continue to believe so...
Continue to do exactly what every other person (other than Roger) on the blog implores you "not" to do... is proof positive of your lack of respect.
You will continue (despite multiple promises otherwise) to just continue to cut and paste articles (generally on completely other subjects). Over and over and demand that people respond to them....
The cutting and pasting of articles is what drove everyone away.
People are back largely because of the comment moderation and the fact that we do not see the dozens and dozens of daily Roger comments I refuse to pass through... as Roger states 2-3 things 50 different ways.
It would be "nice" if you could be a part of this as a participant trying to "add" something to the subjects at hand.
Rather than literally going out of your way to CONTINUE to be the same thorn in everyone's side by antagonizing everyone with off subject cut and pastes from Goddard (or where-ever).
You know exactly what irritates everyone.
And not because cutting and pasting an article actually proves any point or wins any argument. But simply because you KNOW it pisses people off and you apparently are that person who likes to be that agitator and pick at people.
I have never known a clergy person who openly works to piss people off with bad manners.
One little cut and paste should not hurt too much. Many times your onwn thread articles consist of considerable cut and paste.
After numerous short, succinct replies from me, one extended article should be welcomed by you.
It would give you a splendid opportunity to take it apart and show us where it is wrong. Why don't you?
I just stopped counting the top news stories on Fox at number 65. Still didn't run into the story the "pastor" claimed was the top story of the day.
Saw 15 or 20 posts today sourced from Goddard often without attribution.
CHT makes maybe 3 or 4 threads a day, some externally sourced and actually linked.
The pompous obnoxious "pastor " is well past any second or third chance.
Kick him to the curb as they say in Martha's Vineyard, with the trash. It would be good riddance.
Intelligent discussion of 3:48, 50, 53 is welcome.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4VGdj4eqh8
Post a Comment