3 ms·

But who wants to do that other than the government? And it was removed directly because of government sanctions. I understand that the first ammendment is poor

But who wants to do that other than the government? And it was removed directly because of government sanctions. I understand that the first ammendment is poorly understood with regard to private companies and hosting content online, but in this case the first ammendment is applicable.

MichaelCollins 4y ago
londons_explore 4y ago
Does the first amendment protect against treaties the US has signed with other countries requiring the government to take action or violate the treaty?
- pelorat 4y ago
  Depends on who you ask. The general feeling in Europe is that treaties signed by the USA (or Russia, China and many more) are basically worthless. I mean, when does USA ever ratify treaties into (federal) law, or into the constitution for that matter? Republicans would say "hell no it's our sovereignty", Democrats "maybe", the American courts: "maybe but probably not"
  - chrisoverzero 4y ago
    > […] when does USA ever ratify treaties into (federal) law […] Never. Or immediately, depending on your perspective. Either way, there’s no need for further paperwork. > Treaties to which the United States is a party also have the force of federal legislation […] — https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/treaties.htm https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/treaties.htm
soufron 4y ago
Well, it could be seen as accessory to many sort of frauds. But to what extent would that be more accessory than using a car for example - and looking for the car manufacturer responsability?