3 ms·
Stanford files amicus brief in Murthy vs. Missouri
- ungreased0675 2y agoIncredibly hypocritical of them to run to the first amendment as a defense, when they were working to remove other people’s freedom of speech.
- addicted 2y agoYeah that’s neither what they did nor how the first amendment works. The first amendment places restrictions on what the government can do not what private entities can and cannot restrict.
- anamax 2y agoIt is reasonably well established that the government can't ask others to do what it can't legally do. The First Amendment says that the government can't tell the NYT not to publish stories about the price of tea in China. How is that different from the First Amendment says that the government can't tell Facebook not to publish stories about the price of tea in China?
- ImPostingOnHN 2y agoYou seem to be interchangeably using 'ask' (make a case for) and 'tell' (order under power of law). The difference between these two words gets to the heart of the matter, because the former is legal and totally okay.
- duxup 2y agoTelling someone they’re wrong or that they disagree with someone, even if they are a part of the government while doing so, is not removing someone’s freedom of speech. Government, and those in it, also have a right to speech.
- duxup 2y agoAt least as far as the arguments made in March SCOTUS seemed largely skeptical of the limits some states seem to want to put on government as far as their communication with social media companies: https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/03/supreme-court-seems-skeptical-of-restricting-government-communications-with-social-media-companies/ https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/03/supreme-court-seems-skept...