3 ms·

You claim that this bill "violates free speech". Can you expand on that? That's... quite the claim to just throw out there without any references.

nickthegreek 2y ago
Today's issue of Platformer explains it as the following: >The Supreme Court has previously held that Congress can’t ban foreign propaganda, including propaganda from China. In Lamont vs. Postmaster General, the court considered a law that required the postmaster general to detain “communist political propaganda” sent through the mail. The Post Office was then required to send the addressee a card asking whether they wanted the propaganda to be delivered, in what the court ultimately ruled had an unconstitutional chilling effect on speech. https://www.platformer.news/tiktok-ban-bill-senate-legal-challenge-first-amendment/ https://www.platformer.news/tiktok-ban-bill-senate-legal-cha...
- zeroonetwothree 2y ago
  It’s obviously not the same situation so blindly assuming that precedent means the same outcome is wrong. In particular TikTok is not being “banned” based on content, so it’s likely strict scrutiny will not apply.
orwin 2y ago
US version of "free speech" is that the congress cannot make a law that prevents someone from speaking. It was an example of extreme freedom (i don't have the English translation, but basically a freedom that supersede other freedoms, its philosophy 101 or close to that) It's less true now, starting from when the mafia used this freedom to threaten judges and jury (Basically, when 80% of people think "full freedom of speech is stupid in this particular case", the US government will effectively suppress it). I've talked with someone who argued that it effectively never truly existed, and gave me a lot of pre-prohibition examples i can't remember, and even a few from pre-civil war era, that targeted white people (which was surprising because most of the other did not), but i don't know if i trust him, and don't really know US history well, so if you're interested, you should research it yourself and not trust what i just wrote (which is basically, "Yes, No, It's complicated and i don't really know". I'm such a helpful person :/) [edit] Not saying if it's good or bad btw, extreme freedoms are a cultural foundation of the US, and in my opinion define the country.

nickthegreek 2y ago

Today's issue of Platformer explains it as the following: >The Supreme Court has previously held that Congress can’t ban foreign propaganda, including propaganda from China. In Lamont vs. Postmaster General, the court considered a law that required the postmaster general to detain “communist political propaganda” sent through the mail. The Post Office was then required to send the addressee a card asking whether they wanted the propaganda to be delivered, in what the court ultimately ruled had an unconstitutional chilling effect on speech. https://www.platformer.news/tiktok-ban-bill-senate-legal-challenge-first-amendment/ https://www.platformer.news/tiktok-ban-bill-senate-legal-cha...

zeroonetwothree 2y ago
It’s obviously not the same situation so blindly assuming that precedent means the same outcome is wrong. In particular TikTok is not being “banned” based on content, so it’s likely strict scrutiny will not apply.

orwin 2y ago

US version of "free speech" is that the congress cannot make a law that prevents someone from speaking. It was an example of extreme freedom (i don't have the English translation, but basically a freedom that supersede other freedoms, its philosophy 101 or close to that) It's less true now, starting from when the mafia used this freedom to threaten judges and jury (Basically, when 80% of people think "full freedom of speech is stupid in this particular case", the US government will effectively suppress it). I've talked with someone who argued that it effectively never truly existed, and gave me a lot of pre-prohibition examples i can't remember, and even a few from pre-civil war era, that targeted white people (which was surprising because most of the other did not), but i don't know if i trust him, and don't really know US history well, so if you're interested, you should research it yourself and not trust what i just wrote (which is basically, "Yes, No, It's complicated and i don't really know". I'm such a helpful person :/) [edit] Not saying if it's good or bad btw, extreme freedoms are a cultural foundation of the US, and in my opinion define the country.