Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 68

Thread: Supreme Court Takes Case That Could End Internet Censorship, Expand First Amendment

  1. #1

    Supreme Court Takes Case That Could End Internet Censorship, Expand First Amendment

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...irst-amendment

    After the recent purge of over 800 independent media outlets on Facebook, the Supreme Court is now hearing a case that could have ramifications for any future attempts at similar purges.



    The United States Supreme Court has agreed to take a case that could change free speech on the Internet forever.

    Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, No. 17-702, the case that it has agreed to take, will decide if the private operator of a public access network is considered a state actor, CNBC reported.

    The case could affect how companies like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Google and YouTube are governed. If the Court were to issue a far-reaching ruling it could subject such companies to First Amendment lawsuits and force them to allow a much broader scope of free speech from its users.

    The Court decided to take the case on Friday and it is the first case that was taken after Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the Court.

    DeeDee Halleck and Jesus Melendez claimed that they were fired from Manhattan Neighborhood Network for speaking critically of the network. And, though the case does not involve the Internet giants, it could create a ruling that expands the First Amendment beyond the government.

    “We stand at a moment when the very issue at the heart of this case — the interplay between private entities, nontraditional media, and the First Amendment — has been playing out in the courts, in other branches of government, and in the media itself,” the attorneys from MNN wrote in their letter to the Court asking it to take the case.

    ...
    This should obviously be watched VERY closely... Full article at link.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintain an
    Honest Money System , which frees the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, is the single largest contributing factor to the World's current Economic Crisis.

    The Elimination of Privacy is the Architecture of Genocide

    Belief, Money, and Violence are the three ways all people are controlled

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Our central bank is not privately owned.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Supreme Court Takes Case That Could End Internet Censorship
    i.e. force private enterprises to serve people they don't want to serve

    Expand First Amendment
    i.e. apply it to private enterprises, to which it is expressly not applicable

  4. #3
    In case any of you need a reminder:

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    A private company, like Facebook, is not Congress and private companies do not make laws. Those are called rules. Seriously, what is wrong with you people who want to limit private property rights of everyone because you don't like the political ideology of a few? Have some principals.

  5. #4
    Whats being debated is the difference between a Platform and a Publisher. Both have their own sets of Rights and Responsibilities. What they want tho is to have ALL Rights and ZERO responsibilities.

    Now, Facebook got its start by funding pretty much from Govt Subsidies (indirectly and buried), which means its Public Property, thus, Free Speech applies on Facebook

    ---

    Either way, the outcome of the Supreme Court ruling will have MASSIVE results, regardless of my opinion, and especially if I am wrong which I very well might be.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintain an
    Honest Money System , which frees the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, is the single largest contributing factor to the World's current Economic Crisis.

    The Elimination of Privacy is the Architecture of Genocide

    Belief, Money, and Violence are the three ways all people are controlled

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Our central bank is not privately owned.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    Whats being debated is the difference between a Platform and a Publisher. Both have their own sets of Rights and Responsibilities. What they want tho is to have ALL Rights and ZERO responsibilities.

    Now, Facebook got its start by funding pretty much from Govt Subsidies (indirectly and buried), which means its Public Property, thus, Free Speech applies on Facebook

    ---

    Either way, the outcome of the Supreme Court ruling will have MASSIVE results, regardless of my opinion, and especially if I am wrong which I very well might be.
    Lol, if a company takes government subsidies, it becomes public property? That's a new one. I'm surprised Facebook's lawyers missed that in their contracts with local municipalities that gave them incentives to set up shop in their towns.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    Whats being debated is the difference between a Platform and a Publisher. Both have their own sets of Rights and Responsibilities. What they want tho is to have ALL Rights and ZERO responsibilities.

    Now, Facebook got its start by funding pretty much from Govt Subsidies (indirectly and buried), which means its Public Property, thus, Free Speech applies on Facebook

    ---

    Either way, the outcome of the Supreme Court ruling will have MASSIVE results, regardless of my opinion, and especially if I am wrong which I very well might be.
    Yep. I'd follow the money before I write facebook off as a private entity.

    Having said that, I wonder why no alternatives have taken shape. Clearly there is a demand for it. How about Truthtube? Or youTruth? Does the left really have ALL the IT/web-design gurus who can make it happen?
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This is getting silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It started silly.
    T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men

    "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." - Plato

    We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me

    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm
    I part ways with "libertarianism" when it transitions from ideology grounded in logic into self-defeating autism for the sake of ideological purity.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Grandmastersexsay View Post
    Lol, if a company takes government subsidies, it becomes public property? That's a new one.
    People paid for phone lines. That means the actual cable that was run from the phone company to their homes. Due to this, it caused the Public Utilities Commission to be formed because it was determined in court that because the people had paid for the phone line itself as well as the services, the PEOPLE owned the phone lines, not the phone company.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintain an
    Honest Money System , which frees the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, is the single largest contributing factor to the World's current Economic Crisis.

    The Elimination of Privacy is the Architecture of Genocide

    Belief, Money, and Violence are the three ways all people are controlled

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Our central bank is not privately owned.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    People paid for phone lines. That means the actual cable that was run from the phone company to their homes. Due to this, it caused the Public Utilities Commission to be formed because it was determined in court that because the people had paid for the phone line itself as well as the services, the PEOPLE owned the phone lines, not the phone company.
    And companies like Facebook don't claim to own the fiberoptic lines of the internet. They are not an ISP. Even though PEOPLE own the phone lines, the PEOPLE don't own a company that is using those phone lines. This is an absurd argument.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    Whats being debated is the difference between a Platform and a Publisher. Both have their own sets of Rights and Responsibilities. What they want tho is to have ALL Rights and ZERO responsibilities.
    Websites like Facebook, unlike traditional publishers, aren't held legally responsible for the content they publish, because they doesn't exercise the same degree of editorial control over their content. I see nothing wrong with that but, if you do, the solution would be to strip them of their immunity, not try to force some kind CRA-style anti-discrimination policy on them.

  12. #10
    What the case is actually about- public access TV: https://abx.com/about/leadership/

    Supreme Court to hear public access TV case

    OCTOBER 16, 2018 10:30:50 AM Elizabeth Lowman
    The US Supreme Court granted certiorari Friday in a case that will determine whether private operators of public access channels qualify as state actors for First Amendment purposes.

    In Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, the Manhattan Neighborhood Network (MNN) suspended producer Jesus Melendez from a leadership program for allegedly harassing an employee. In response, Melendez and Deedee Halleck, another producer, produced and appeared in a video using violent language. MNN broadcast the program once in 2012, but after complaints that it violated the station’s harassment policy, ceased broadcasts and suspended Halleck.

    The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled in favor of Melendez and Halleck. The court decided that the public access channels are “public fora,” and the private operators “have a sufficient connection to governmental authority to be deemed state actors” even though the government does not control the networks’ board. According to the court, the First Amendment applied. The network appeals, claiming that the Second Circuit used improper tests in deciding the issues.

    https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/...r-implications

    The Supreme Court accepted the case to settle two questions. The first question is if privately owned public access channels are state actors subject to “constitutional liability,” meaning that speakers on the channels have free-speech rights. The second question is if public access television stations are state actors for constitutional purposes when the state doesn’t control the private channel’s board or operations (i.e., its content).
    The channel is non- profit but is privately owned.
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 10-18-2018 at 05:11 PM.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Grandmastersexsay View Post
    A private company, like Facebook, is not Congress and private companies do not make laws. Those are called rules. Seriously, what is wrong with you people who want to limit private property rights of everyone because you don't like the political ideology of a few? Have some principals.
    If it was simply just a private company, then you would be right.

    Unfortunately Facebook and all of the other major social networking sites have grown far beyond being simple private companies. They work lockstep hand in hand with the government and various government agencies to achieve common goals, such as censorship, propaganda, and mass surveillance.

    Whistleblowers have been proving this for years and Snowden is far from the only one that blew the cover off of this collusion aimed at destroying our civil liberties, concealing damaging information regarding government institutions, and having a lubricated pipeline that pumps pro-government, pro-deep state 24/7 propaganda into every citizens mind using these platforms as the catalyst.

  14. #12
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  15. #13
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Grandmastersexsay View Post
    Lol, if a company takes government subsidies, it becomes public property? That's a new one. I'm surprised Facebook's lawyers missed that in their contracts with local municipalities that gave them incentives to set up shop in their towns.
    One issue I have was that these companies attended congressional hearings where they were instructed to limit speech. They followed the instructions, and this is what happened. So maybe the issue is government. Maybe the government shouldn't be instructing private companies to limit speech.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Grandmastersexsay View Post
    In case any of you need a reminder:



    A private company, like Facebook, is not Congress and private companies do not make laws. Those are called rules. Seriously, what is wrong with you people who want to limit private property rights of everyone because you don't like the political ideology of a few? Have some principals.
    Yep. There's not a single one of us who has a "right" to be on Facebook or Twitter. Liberty people who want to government to fix things aren't Liberty people at all.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Websites like Facebook, unlike traditional publishers, aren't held legally responsible for the content they publish,.....
    That was changed with the recent anti-trafficking law that was signed.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    That was changed with the recent anti-trafficking law that was signed.
    I'm not familiar with that, but I'm assuming it opens them up to liability for content relating to human trafficking?

    If so, there are still other types of potential liability (e.g. re defamation) from which, AFAIK, they're still immune.

    ...as they should be.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    One issue I have was that these companies attended congressional hearings where they were instructed to limit speech. They followed the instructions, and this is what happened. So maybe the issue is government. Maybe the government shouldn't be instructing private companies to limit speech.
    This angle was never discussed in the press.

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    I'm not familiar with that, but I'm assuming it opens them up to liability for content relating to human trafficking?

    If so, there are still other types of potential liability (e.g. re defamation) from which, AFAIK, they're still immune.

    ...as they should be.
    The way things should be have zero bearing on the way things are.

  23. #20
    Pfizer Macht Frei!

    Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.


    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!

    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  24. #21
    Didn’t some court already rule that Trump could not block people on Twitter?

    How was that justified?
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  25. #22
    Pfizer Macht Frei!

    Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.


    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!

    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Champuckett View Post
    If it was simply just a private company, then you would be right.

    Unfortunately Facebook and all of the other major social networking sites have grown far beyond being simple private companies. They work lockstep hand in hand with the government and various government agencies to achieve common goals, such as censorship, propaganda, and mass surveillance.

    Whistleblowers have been proving this for years and Snowden is far from the only one that blew the cover off of this collusion aimed at destroying our civil liberties, concealing damaging information regarding government institutions, and having a lubricated pipeline that pumps pro-government, pro-deep state 24/7 propaganda into every citizens mind using these platforms as the catalyst.
    The state has grown far outside it’s designated bounds via the loophole of private-public partnership. That is the elephant in the room.

    “Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex."
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  27. #24
    So Trump cant block people, but Twitter can block who ever it feels like, when the "rules" are very subjectively applied.

    The REAL solution here is the FREE MARKET. People get fed up with being censored, they should STOP USING THAT SERVICE PERIOD. Trouble is that there are no alternatives. There is NO FREE MARKET. And they are doing everything in their power to make sure they keep the power they have usurped. The results of their election interference are only to maintain their power over allowing people to communicate. Of course its all surveillance anyway so I could give two $#@!s less if Fedbook gets shut down or people choose to walk away from it.

    Thus, the ruling will have MAJOR ramifications everywhere, including how even small forums like here operate.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintain an
    Honest Money System , which frees the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, is the single largest contributing factor to the World's current Economic Crisis.

    The Elimination of Privacy is the Architecture of Genocide

    Belief, Money, and Violence are the three ways all people are controlled

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Our central bank is not privately owned.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by nobody's_hero View Post
    Yep. I'd follow the money before I write facebook off as a private entity.

    Having said that, I wonder why no alternatives have taken shape. Clearly there is a demand for it. How about Truthtube? Or youTruth? Does the left really have ALL the IT/web-design gurus who can make it happen?
    That is another interesting aspect of this. What leads to total market domination by a private company? It’s usually a combination of things. Dumb luck is sometimes part of the formula, especially early on.

    A social networking company is a special case. It’s not just one customer making the decision. One customer brings in more customers who want to interact with other customers. The platform gains momentum. They reach a critical mass of customers. A person must use the service to interface with others.

    More traditionally, follow the money. The more money that a company has, the more that they can buy out their competition until there is no competition. Every time a competitor arises, they are bought out.

    Now add government. Did government help with funding? Is government a substantial customer? Does government interfere in the market place with regulation that eliminates competition?

    Once all of that occurs, you have a situation like Facebook and Twitter. At risk of repeating myself, Twitter is more like a phone company now. Everyone has a Twitter address, like a phone number or email address. Celebrities, businesses, politicians, government entities, etc all advertise their Twitter address.

    Is there an entity that can ban you from acquiring a phone number? Is there an entity that can block from gettting an email address? That is what Twitter and Facebook can now do.

    Can a person live without a Twitter name? Can a person live without a Facebook account? Can a person live without a phone number? Can a person live without an email address? The answer to all of the above is “yes”, but it can be severely limiting depending upon one wants to do, especially if what they want to do is exercise “speech”.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    That is another interesting aspect of this. What leads to total market domination by a private company? It’s usually a combination of things. Dumb luck is sometimes part of the formula, especially early on.

    A social networking company is a special case. It’s not just one customer making the decision. One customer brings in more customers who want to interact with other customers. The platform gains momentum. They reach a critical mass of customers. A person must use the service to interface with others.

    More traditionally, follow the money. The more money that a company has, the more that they can buy out their competition until there is no competition. Every time a competitor arises, they are bought out.

    Now add government. Did government help with funding? Is government a substantial customer? Does government interfere in the market place with regulation that eliminates competition?

    Once all of that occurs, you have a situation like Facebook and Twitter. At risk of repeating myself, Twitter is more like a phone company now. Everyone has a Twitter address, like a phone number or email address. Celebrities, businesses, politicians, government entities, etc all advertise their Twitter address.

    Is there an entity that can ban you from acquiring a phone number? Is there an entity that can block from gettting an email address? That is what Twitter and Facebook can now do.

    Can a person live without a Twitter name? Can a person live without a Facebook account? Can a person live without a phone number? Can a person live without an email address? The answer to all of the above is “yes”, but it can be severely limiting depending upon one wants to do, especially if what they want to do is exercise “speech”.
    It has been my observation that big corrupt business cannot exist without big corrupt government. Big corrupt government cannot exist without big corrupt business.

    Ask yourself this:

    YouTube/Facebook/Google/Twitter makes money off of both liberals and conservatives. Why the hell would they nonchalantly cut-off half of their support? If you're running a business, why do you look at half of your customer base and say, "F'k You, I don't want you to make me money!"

    Unless . . .. you're getting a better deal from somewhere else, to convince you to make business decisions that are absolutely f'king retarded.
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This is getting silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It started silly.
    T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men

    "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." - Plato

    We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me

    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm
    I part ways with "libertarianism" when it transitions from ideology grounded in logic into self-defeating autism for the sake of ideological purity.

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    Didn’t some court already rule that Trump could not block people on Twitter?

    How was that justified?
    White house press secretary said the twitter account tweets are official statements of the president. A president can't selectively block citizens from hearing what he says. However he can mute them so he doesn't have to hear what they say back.
    “…let us teach them that all who draw breath are of equal worth, and that those who seek to press heel upon the throat of liberty, will fall to the cry of FREEDOM!!!” – Spartacus, War of the Damned

    BTC: 1AFbCLYU3G1dkbsSJnk3spWeEwpqYVC2Pq

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    Didn’t some court already rule that Trump could not block people on Twitter?

    How was that justified?
    It's because he is the president and we have a Constitutional right to address our grievances to our government.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    It's because he is the president and we have a Constitutional right to address our grievances to our government.
    And Twitter is the only method of doing that? That makes the case for Twitter officially being a protected free speech zone.
    Last edited by Brian4Liberty; 10-19-2018 at 12:36 PM.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    And Twitter is the only methid of doing that? That makes the case for Twitter officially being a protected free speech zone.
    If Trump, as president, can lambast people publicly from his Twitter account, shouldn't people be allowed to lambast back?
    There is no spoon.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-30-2014, 03:44 PM
  2. Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Major Second Amendment Case
    By Lucille in forum Second Amendment
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-07-2014, 08:31 AM
  3. Rare 10th Amendment case heads to Supreme Court
    By bobbyw24 in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-25-2011, 02:40 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-21-2009, 07:00 AM
  5. Supreme Court to Rule in Second Amendment Case
    By FrankRep in forum Second Amendment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-05-2009, 09:07 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •