4 ms·

Doesn’t everybody have the right to not answer questions? Americans don’t have to do this either

dghlsakjg 4y ago
Surprisingly, no. You have the right to not testify/incriminate against yourself. Beyond that, you can absolutely be compelled to answer questions.
amelius 4y ago
Zuck had to answer questions.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ghufran_syed 4y ago
That's correct, they certainly have the right to not answer questions...and the US government has the right to interpret that lack of cooperation any way it chooses, and, say, ban their products.
- k_paleologos 4y ago
  What government can do is limited by the constitution. Generally speaking, unless these companies have done something unlawful there is no ground for banning their products. Is it established that they have broken US laws?
  - kube-system 4y ago
    > Article I, Section 8 > The Congress shall have Power [...] > To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations
  - MattGaiser 4y ago
    > Generally speaking, unless these companies have done something unlawful there is no ground for banning their products. I don't think the right to sell goods is in the Constitution. What is in the constitution is an explicit grant to power to Congress to "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations"
  - loeg 4y ago
    - dang 4y ago
      Posting like this will get you banned here, regardless of how wrong another account is or you feel it is. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.
  - galdosdi 4y ago
    Have you read the US constitution? It is very short, easily reeadable in an hour. So if your comment is sincere, you would cite the specific clause of the constitution that you are worried is being violated. There is no such clause.
  - PenguinCoder 4y ago
    Not publicly, because they won't step up and answer questions, in public.
  - oneoff786 4y ago
    It will be if they sell their banned products
marcosdumay 4y ago
When it's some country's Congress questioning, there are usually penalties to not answering. But, of course, one can always just face the penalties.
galdosdi 4y ago
Americans do have to answer questions posed by Congress or a court in many, many situations. It is commonplace for large public companies for example, to have to answer questions from regulators or Congress. For example, any time there's a merger, the federal government must approve it to ensure anti-monopoly laws are not violated by the new market arrangement. Or you may recall the famous cases of auto executives being questioned over car safety, or Zuckerberg being questioned over social media's effects on society. Are you new to following US business news? Are you just very confused and think the famous "fifth amendment" applies here? Go back and read it if so. > Americans don’t have to do this either
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
  I think his point is that you can choose to go to jail for contempt rather than answer anything. If your sit in jail long enough, the world moves on and your testimony is no longer relevant. That’s when a judge releases you (i think).
skeeter2020 4y ago
When called before congress? That's not accurate, beyond you don't have to, but then pay the price - much like these companies have.
staticman2 4y ago
Americans have to answer questions if you are issued a legal subpoena, when it's census time, among other situations.
rossdavidh 4y ago
Many people have faced serious legal consequences for not answering questions from Congress, for example related to Jan. 6 riot. You do have the right to avoid testifying against yourself, so often Congress has to grant immunity from prosecution, in order to remove this legally justifiable excuse for not answering questions. I remember in the Iran/contra scandal, Congress was asked not to do this so that some of the people involved could be prosecuted, but chose to proceed for various reasons best known to themselves.

Surprisingly, no. You have the right to not testify/incriminate against yourself. Beyond that, you can absolutely be compelled to answer questions.

amelius 4y ago

Zuck had to answer questions.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

ghufran_syed 4y ago

That's correct, they certainly have the right to not answer questions...and the US government has the right to interpret that lack of cooperation any way it chooses, and, say, ban their products.

k_paleologos 4y ago
What government can do is limited by the constitution. Generally speaking, unless these companies have done something unlawful there is no ground for banning their products. Is it established that they have broken US laws?
- kube-system 4y ago
  > Article I, Section 8 > The Congress shall have Power [...] > To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations
- MattGaiser 4y ago
  > Generally speaking, unless these companies have done something unlawful there is no ground for banning their products. I don't think the right to sell goods is in the Constitution. What is in the constitution is an explicit grant to power to Congress to "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations"
- loeg 4y ago
  - dang 4y ago
    Posting like this will get you banned here, regardless of how wrong another account is or you feel it is. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.
- galdosdi 4y ago
  Have you read the US constitution? It is very short, easily reeadable in an hour. So if your comment is sincere, you would cite the specific clause of the constitution that you are worried is being violated. There is no such clause.
- PenguinCoder 4y ago
  Not publicly, because they won't step up and answer questions, in public.
- oneoff786 4y ago
  It will be if they sell their banned products

marcosdumay 4y ago

When it's some country's Congress questioning, there are usually penalties to not answering. But, of course, one can always just face the penalties.

galdosdi 4y ago

Americans do have to answer questions posed by Congress or a court in many, many situations. It is commonplace for large public companies for example, to have to answer questions from regulators or Congress. For example, any time there's a merger, the federal government must approve it to ensure anti-monopoly laws are not violated by the new market arrangement. Or you may recall the famous cases of auto executives being questioned over car safety, or Zuckerberg being questioned over social media's effects on society. Are you new to following US business news? Are you just very confused and think the famous "fifth amendment" applies here? Go back and read it if so. > Americans don’t have to do this either

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
I think his point is that you can choose to go to jail for contempt rather than answer anything. If your sit in jail long enough, the world moves on and your testimony is no longer relevant. That’s when a judge releases you (i think).

skeeter2020 4y ago

When called before congress? That's not accurate, beyond you don't have to, but then pay the price - much like these companies have.

staticman2 4y ago

Americans have to answer questions if you are issued a legal subpoena, when it's census time, among other situations.

rossdavidh 4y ago

Many people have faced serious legal consequences for not answering questions from Congress, for example related to Jan. 6 riot. You do have the right to avoid testifying against yourself, so often Congress has to grant immunity from prosecution, in order to remove this legally justifiable excuse for not answering questions. I remember in the Iran/contra scandal, Congress was asked not to do this so that some of the people involved could be prosecuted, but chose to proceed for various reasons best known to themselves.