11 ms·

rare scotus W, but i strongly suspect that because this data is "owned" by someone other than the people that generated it that said owners will simply choose t

rare scotus W, but i strongly suspect that because this data is "owned" by someone other than the people that generated it that said owners will simply choose to voluntarily cooperate with government inquiries 100% of the time. You can suppress information if the government unconstitutionally compels google to turn it over, but I don't believe that you as a defendant could push to exclude evidence if it was willingly turned over by a third party that had the right to have it.

dmfdmf 4mo ago
Yes, this is the same argument used when the Biden admin during covid pressured the media companies to cancel people and news they did not like for "misinformation" instead of calling it censorship. This and LEOs buying data from Big Corp is just end-running the 1st and 4th amendments which is ultimately fascism.
- DANmode 4mo ago
  It’s again legal for the US government to publish propaganda targeted against their citizens, so you’ll struggle to ever know for sure what’s unadulterated US media.
- deathanatos 4mo ago
  The Biden administration both asked nicely for actual, factually incorrect information to be corrected by sites and pressured sites. They were taken to court over both, and they prevailed on the former and lost on the latter: the administration (any administration) is permitted to ask a site for a correction, and it is then truly at the site's discretion. They are not permitted to pressure them.
  - CobrastanJorji 4mo ago
    "Permitted" is doing a lot of work there.
  - parineum 4mo ago
    > The Biden administration both asked nicely for actual, factually incorrect information to be corrected by sites and pressured sites. Like the definitely known and uncontested factual information on the origin of the virus?
  - ratelimitsteve 4mo ago
    you are factually correct but realistically the office of the president cannot ask for anything without pressure, by nature of being the office of the president

dmfdmf 4mo ago

Yes, this is the same argument used when the Biden admin during covid pressured the media companies to cancel people and news they did not like for "misinformation" instead of calling it censorship. This and LEOs buying data from Big Corp is just end-running the 1st and 4th amendments which is ultimately fascism.

DANmode 4mo ago
It’s again legal for the US government to publish propaganda targeted against their citizens, so you’ll struggle to ever know for sure what’s unadulterated US media.
deathanatos 4mo ago
The Biden administration both asked nicely for actual, factually incorrect information to be corrected by sites and pressured sites. They were taken to court over both, and they prevailed on the former and lost on the latter: the administration (any administration) is permitted to ask a site for a correction, and it is then truly at the site's discretion. They are not permitted to pressure them.
- CobrastanJorji 4mo ago
  "Permitted" is doing a lot of work there.
- parineum 4mo ago
  > The Biden administration both asked nicely for actual, factually incorrect information to be corrected by sites and pressured sites. Like the definitely known and uncontested factual information on the origin of the virus?
- ratelimitsteve 4mo ago
  you are factually correct but realistically the office of the president cannot ask for anything without pressure, by nature of being the office of the president