3 ms·

That's a general misunderstanding of the court. PornHub has a decent shot here. Most of the laws Texas has passed around social media haven't survived court sc

That's a general misunderstanding of the court. PornHub has a decent shot here. Most of the laws Texas has passed around social media haven't survived court scrutiny. There is a good chance this won't either.

danShumway 3y ago
Agreed; the Supreme Court is heavily Conservative, but that doesn't always align 100% with what the more vocal parts of the modern Conservative movement want or believe. I don't try to predict Supreme Court rulings, who knows what they'll do -- but I would not be shocked at all to see Conservative members of the court ruling in favor of Pornhub. It would be very consistent with prior rulings. The Conservative court is slightly weird; it's not always going to be perfectly aligned with what the party wants. Nor is it clear that the broader Republican party would be on board with these kinds of restrictions anyway even if the court was just parroting them. It's an oversimplification and there are caveats (coughThomascough), but in general both Conservative and Liberal courts tend to overall lean more towards broad interpretations of the 1st Amendment than the average American does. It's not a safe bet that they would suddenly reverse that trend.
- earthboundkid 3y ago
  > I don't try to predict Supreme Court rulings, who knows what they'll do Why wouldn't you? They all have very predictable tendencies and don't ever surprise you. There are some cases where you can predict that Roberts will vacillate, but for the most part they are extremely predictable if you follow the court with even passing interest. > Nor is it clear that the broader Republican party would be on board with these kinds of restrictions anyway even if the court was just parroting them. These laws poll over a majority with Democrats. They are extremely popular.
  - danShumway 3y ago
    > extremely predictable if you follow the court with even passing interest. :shrug: Sometimes I get surprised. But certainly if you are going to make a prediction, that prediction is not going to be "we'll do a 180 on our typical rulings on the 1st Amendment." That would not be extreme consistency or predictability. Most court precedent in this area is against this kind of restriction; me refusing to make a prediction is being charitable, it's leaving open the option that the justices might decide to do something weird. If you really believe they're going to be predictable, then the situation I'm looking at is that the current Supreme Court (Conservatives included) hasn't exactly been kind to Internet regulation and has issued extremely broad rulings reinforcing the 1st Amendment. I'm not sure that not liking porn means that's going to go out the window; this is the same Supreme Court that recently ruled unanimously that Twitter wasn't liable for ISIS content on the platform -- even though I would hazard a guess that the Liberal and Conservative members of the court both don't love ISIS. There's a general trend here with how the court is approaching Internet regulation. > These laws poll over a majority with Democrats. I can find one source for this and it's a Conservative super pac specifically dedicated to "family values". I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just having a hard time finding any quality polling. Regardless, it still is not clear that the overall Republican party would broadly support ID verification online if it became a hot-button issue. Lots of things poll well in abstract before they become reality. And I can't stress this enough, the Supreme Court does not simply parrot Conservative views. The members have their own definitions of what Conservatism means and their rulings bias towards their own definitions.
earthboundkid 3y ago
Why? Roberts votes with the liberals and then the law gets upheld 5-4. Do you really think Cavanaugh is going to break off here? It's definitely not going to be Alito, Thomas, or Barrett (!).
- danShumway 3y ago
  > Do you really think Cavanaugh is going to break off here? It's definitely not going to be Alito, Thomas, or Barrett (!). I would not be surprised to see Cavanaugh or Barrett rule in favor of Pornhub. Thomas is weird, he flip-flops a lot on these issues. I don't know how he'd rule. You might be referencing Barrett's Catholic beliefs here, but in terms of how she's actually ruled on the court and what she's written in her opinions, it would not be at all out of character for her to side with Pornhub.

danShumway 3y ago

Agreed; the Supreme Court is heavily Conservative, but that doesn't always align 100% with what the more vocal parts of the modern Conservative movement want or believe. I don't try to predict Supreme Court rulings, who knows what they'll do -- but I would not be shocked at all to see Conservative members of the court ruling in favor of Pornhub. It would be very consistent with prior rulings. The Conservative court is slightly weird; it's not always going to be perfectly aligned with what the party wants. Nor is it clear that the broader Republican party would be on board with these kinds of restrictions anyway even if the court was just parroting them. It's an oversimplification and there are caveats (coughThomascough), but in general both Conservative and Liberal courts tend to overall lean more towards broad interpretations of the 1st Amendment than the average American does. It's not a safe bet that they would suddenly reverse that trend.

earthboundkid 3y ago
> I don't try to predict Supreme Court rulings, who knows what they'll do Why wouldn't you? They all have very predictable tendencies and don't ever surprise you. There are some cases where you can predict that Roberts will vacillate, but for the most part they are extremely predictable if you follow the court with even passing interest. > Nor is it clear that the broader Republican party would be on board with these kinds of restrictions anyway even if the court was just parroting them. These laws poll over a majority with Democrats. They are extremely popular.
- danShumway 3y ago
  > extremely predictable if you follow the court with even passing interest. :shrug: Sometimes I get surprised. But certainly if you are going to make a prediction, that prediction is not going to be "we'll do a 180 on our typical rulings on the 1st Amendment." That would not be extreme consistency or predictability. Most court precedent in this area is against this kind of restriction; me refusing to make a prediction is being charitable, it's leaving open the option that the justices might decide to do something weird. If you really believe they're going to be predictable, then the situation I'm looking at is that the current Supreme Court (Conservatives included) hasn't exactly been kind to Internet regulation and has issued extremely broad rulings reinforcing the 1st Amendment. I'm not sure that not liking porn means that's going to go out the window; this is the same Supreme Court that recently ruled unanimously that Twitter wasn't liable for ISIS content on the platform -- even though I would hazard a guess that the Liberal and Conservative members of the court both don't love ISIS. There's a general trend here with how the court is approaching Internet regulation. > These laws poll over a majority with Democrats. I can find one source for this and it's a Conservative super pac specifically dedicated to "family values". I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just having a hard time finding any quality polling. Regardless, it still is not clear that the overall Republican party would broadly support ID verification online if it became a hot-button issue. Lots of things poll well in abstract before they become reality. And I can't stress this enough, the Supreme Court does not simply parrot Conservative views. The members have their own definitions of what Conservatism means and their rulings bias towards their own definitions.

earthboundkid 3y ago

Why? Roberts votes with the liberals and then the law gets upheld 5-4. Do you really think Cavanaugh is going to break off here? It's definitely not going to be Alito, Thomas, or Barrett (!).

danShumway 3y ago
> Do you really think Cavanaugh is going to break off here? It's definitely not going to be Alito, Thomas, or Barrett (!). I would not be surprised to see Cavanaugh or Barrett rule in favor of Pornhub. Thomas is weird, he flip-flops a lot on these issues. I don't know how he'd rule. You might be referencing Barrett's Catholic beliefs here, but in terms of how she's actually ruled on the court and what she's written in her opinions, it would not be at all out of character for her to side with Pornhub.