Posted on 09/16/2022 8:28:49 PM PDT by aimhigh
Good point. Imgur's counts would dive.
Ping to Semimojo. I guess this particular Federal court doesn’t see it as a first amendment issue for the corporation.
All the other states within this Federal district need to immediately pass similar laws.
All these big tech companies need to be smashed. How dare they try to pull this sh*t in the USA?
You can't have users in the billions and claim to be a "club."
The law applies only to sites with millions of users. Free Republic is quite a bit smaller than that.
Where in this do you see an exclusion for FR?
And your made up “club” narrative doesn’t cut it because the court doesn’t draw that distinction and because FR has less stringent membership requirements than any of the socials.
The court doesn’t draw a distinction, but the Texas law does. The law requires 50 million monthly users in the U.S. I question if any site will have that many if the bots aren’t counted.
I agree there is a difference - but stepping on speech is stepping on speech - even if it’s to enforce “decorum and courtesy”
My view is that it is necessary that freedom of speech be protected in the United States of America, and I no longer regard the issue as academic. Allowing massive communications companies to block people based on their opinions is a path to destruction.
We must require the first amendment to be enforced for the purpose for which it was intended. To stop free speech from being suppressed.
Why do you think the framers weren’t able to put that intent into words?
They did for those with the wisdom necessary to see it.
Why would you prohibit the government silencing people but still allow people to be silenced? As the Supreme Court has long ago noted, "no portion of the constitution may be read in such a way as to render it having no effect."
To prohibit government, but still create the condition where speech can be censored is to read the first amendment as having "no effect."
If it has "no effect", it's a wrong interpretation.
Who’s being denied the ability to speak?
Who can’t post any thought they like on their web site for the entire world to see?
Or do you think the framers intended you to be able to seize my property to amplify your message?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.