A federal judge yesterday ordered the Biden administration to halt a wide range of communications with social media companies, siding with Missouri and Louisiana in a lawsuit that alleges Biden and his administration violated the First Amendment by colluding with social networks “to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content.”

  • @CmdrShepard
    link
    1
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The first amendment is the first amendment, science or anti-science or anything in between. Whether or not I agree with anything in your comment.

    What else is there to take from this? Sounds like the typical “unlimited free speech” argument that we’ve all heard before.

    If you want to argue about the law, the legality of this action has yet to be determined, so I’m assuming you must be in support of it, no? What is your stance if you think there’s confusion on my part about what that may be.

    Lies and threats may be illegal but they violate the idea of free speech, so why do you support these restrictions on the first amendment and not others?

    • barf
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      Lies and threats may be illegal but they violate the idea of free speech, so why do you support these restrictions on the first amendment and not others?

      Because they’re laws the we have as a society agreed upon and put into place. Pretty simple stuff. I do not understand how thinking that the law should be followed is such a wild idea.

      If we want vaccine misinformation to be illegal, we should pass a law. Otherwise, the first amendment stands. What’s so weird about that?