3 ms·

> Well, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. While the Government cannot police google's speech, it can certainly break it up with anti-mo

> Well, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. While the Government cannot police google's speech, it can certainly break it up with anti-monopoly laws. Does the first amendment prevent the government from using economic regulations to punish political speech by companies? There's actually a lot of SCOTUS case law on this question. Including very recent cases, such as http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/06/opinion-analysis-court-rules-narrowly-for-baker-in-same-sex-wedding-cake-case/ http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/06/opinion-analysis-court-rul... > But the critical question of when and how Phillips’ right to exercise his religion can be limited had to be determined, Kennedy emphasized, in a proceeding that was not tainted by hostility to religion. Here, Kennedy observed, the “neutral and respectful consideration to which Phillips was entitled was compromised” by comments by members of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. At one hearing, Kennedy stressed, commissioners repeatedly “endorsed the view that religious beliefs cannot legitimately be carried into the public sphere or commercial domain, implying that religious beliefs and persons are less than fully welcome in Colorado’s business community. Similar standards are applied elsewhere; e.g., local govt's limiting assembly (e.g. requiring permits) or speech (eg in council meetings) is, in general, acceptable. But only if those restrictions are applied without ideological/religious bias. Ditto for schools. If the executive branch systematically communicated that it was breaking up Google because of ideological disagreements between the ruling political party and Google's executive team, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see SCOTUS slap down that enforcement action.

ardy42 8y ago
> Does the first amendment prevent the government from using economic regulations to punish political speech by companies? I doubt it. The politicians criticizing Google's political actions aren't going to be the ones prosecuting it or adjudicating its violations. It'll be referred to regulatory bodies that will determine if it's in violation or not in a much more neutral manner. The case you cited was about improper bias exhibited by an adjudicator in the course of deciding a case.
- thrmsforbfast 8y ago
  Right, that's why I said "the executive branch" rather than e.g. "Trump himself". I.e. if there's a clear chain of evidence from the adjudicator to the politicians, then SCOTUS would really have to pivot hard on many fundamental constitutional questions. Only a GOP-first, conservative-second court would do that. The current conservative wing of the court is very much conservative-first. I should've been more explicit about my meaning :)
oh-kumudo 8y ago
Google is big enough, and have effectively monopoly in a lot of areas. I am sure if the current admin trying to hurt it, they can always find ways to do it.

ardy42 8y ago

> Does the first amendment prevent the government from using economic regulations to punish political speech by companies? I doubt it. The politicians criticizing Google's political actions aren't going to be the ones prosecuting it or adjudicating its violations. It'll be referred to regulatory bodies that will determine if it's in violation or not in a much more neutral manner. The case you cited was about improper bias exhibited by an adjudicator in the course of deciding a case.

thrmsforbfast 8y ago
Right, that's why I said "the executive branch" rather than e.g. "Trump himself". I.e. if there's a clear chain of evidence from the adjudicator to the politicians, then SCOTUS would really have to pivot hard on many fundamental constitutional questions. Only a GOP-first, conservative-second court would do that. The current conservative wing of the court is very much conservative-first. I should've been more explicit about my meaning :)

oh-kumudo 8y ago

Google is big enough, and have effectively monopoly in a lot of areas. I am sure if the current admin trying to hurt it, they can always find ways to do it.