Posted on 03/19/2024 7:57:03 AM PDT by yesthatjallen
In a debate Monday at the Supreme Court challenging the Biden administration’s alleged coordination with Big Tech to censor certain messages, one justice raised eyebrows in her comments about the government’s relationship with the First Amendment.
The case stems from a lawsuit brought by Republican-led states Missouri and Louisiana that accused high-ranking government officials of working with giant social media companies “under the guise of combating misinformation” that ultimately led to censoring speech on topics that included Hunter Biden’s laptop, COVID-19 origins and the efficacy of face masks — which the states argued was a First Amendment violation.
In nearly two hours of oral arguments, the justices debated whether the Biden administration crossed the constitutional line, and whether its outreach efforts with private companies amounted to permissible persuasion or encouragement versus illegal coercion or threats of retaliation.
“It’s got these big clubs available to it, and so it’s treating Facebook and these other platforms like their subordinates,” Justice Samuel Alito said. But Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson took a different approach.
“Your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the federal government in significant ways in the most important time periods,” she told the lawyer representing Louisiana, Missouri and private plaintiffs.
“The government actually has a duty to take steps to protect the citizens of this country… by encouraging or even pressuring platforms to take down harmful information,” she said.
SNIP
That’s what it’s supposed to do.
Where did she get her law degree? A box of oatmeal?..................
Historian newly discovers previous drafts of the Constitution, the latest entitled, "Hamstringer of Federal Powers."
The Bill of Rights was designed specifically to hamstring government.
Oh my. When we the people want disinformation by the government stopped, we’re arrested and imprisoned (Jan. 6).
She’s right - although its probably not what she meant,
The whole Constitution was designed to limit government.
She’s dumb as dirt and twice as common
Godzilla reported: Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is concerned that the First Amendment is “hamstringing the Government” when it comes to censoring speech on social media. She made the comment during a hearing a lawsuit against the US govt for pressuring social sites to censor ‘misinformation’ (which has since been proven to be factual information). Uh, well, yeah, that’s literally the entire reason it was created.
OBSERVATION - She speaks the brainless concept of what the progressive left think of how the constitution does or does not operate. You can take her ‘thoughts’ and multiply it by millions of mind numbed democrats. If the government can stop what you say, why not stop who you are allowed to pray to or who you are allowed to meet or any type of protest against the government at all?
IN RELATED - USSC observers note that the court is inclined to side with the Biden administration, allowing federal agencies to restart what is effectively government censorship of online political speech just in time for the 2024 election.
Of course she does.
In the eyes of lunatic liberals like her, the Government must be all seeing, all knowing and un-reprochable.
The government wants their own bill of rights overrule ours.
NO!
WORDS of Supreme Court Justice, KJB. Face-WORDS-deeds ALERT!
“Ham”strings?
Offensive to muslims.
The purpose of the Constitution is to hamstring government. Especially the Bill of Rights.
What a stupid woman.
Sounds like something Jesse Jackson would say.
This ooga booga chicken dancing voodoo priestess defiles the SCOTUS.
My dog has more common sense of law than that creature.
That thing has no business being seated on the SCOTUS.
She’s a “positive rights” idiot, like Obama - people have “rights” for Government to give stuff to them, and to do stuff for them: a “right” to housing, or a “right” to government medical care, a “right” to their own view of their sexuality, etc....
In her world, all this “Free Speech” nonsense hobbles the government from providing all these “rights”
Problem identified. She was referring to several articles of the 1936 Russian constitution. Glenn Beck went through several articles and it is clear she just grabbed the wrong constitution.
When they wrote the Constitution they knew the Democratic Party was coming ,LOL
Offshoot of Nimrata (I want to know your real name) Randhawa.
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.