8 ms·

Does labor law supersede Musk's first amendment rights? I don't get it.

• tablespoon 6y ago
  > Does labor law supersede Musk's first amendment rights? I don't get it. I don't think first amendment rights mean you have the right to literally say or write whatever you want, such as a threat, without consequence. And Musk did make a threat, it was just a milder one than to send in the Pinkertons.
• seoaeu 6y ago
  Um, yes? Same way that libel laws supersede first amendment rights. None of the rights in the constitution are absolute, especially when they conflict with each other
  • baryphonic 6y ago
    Libel law explicitly applies only to factual claims that are false and damaging to another person's reputation. Opinions, including the ones Elon Musk expressed, would very clearly be protected speech in the context of libel law. Why these restrictions on libel law? Well, because of the First Amendment. Again, why should the courts restrict libel law to such a degree but allow labor law to dictate what opinions someone can or cannot express? (We can all accept, I hope, that Musk's tweet was his opinion.) Also, which constitutional rights are in conflict here? Labor law is just enacted law, not constitutional in nature. If labor law conflicts with the Constitution, the Constitution wins.
• ClumsyPilot 6y ago
  Um, does the law on blackmail supersede first amendment? How about death threats or recruitment for ISIS? Obviously extreme examples, but making a point that first amendment has many things it does not protect.
  • baryphonic 6y ago
    Expressing an opinion online about unionization issues is equivalent to blackmail, death threats and recruitment for ISIS? What? I wasn't asking about whether terroristic threats were legitimate exceptions to First Amendment protections; I asked whether labor law was.