- Courtesy Stanley Fish, Prof. Jeremy Waldron gets a long, favorable hearing in the New York Times for his let’s-suppress-hate-speech proposals [Opinionator]
- On the other hand, free speech scores huge victory in Canada as parliament mostly along party lines votes to repeal notorious Section 13 of Canadian Human Rights Act, authorizing private federal complaints over alleged hate speech [Jonathan Kay]
- “Christian Nation” historical writer and Texas curriculum reshaper David Barton sues critics; don’t let him find out what Ed Brayton keeps writing [Reason]
- Pennsylvania bill: “Crime for Minor to Post or Send Messages That ‘Emotional[ly] Distress’ Another Minor?” [Volokh]
- Norfolk, Va. business puts up a big sign protesting eminent domain scheme to seize its property; guess what happens next [Marc Scribner, Open Market]
- Chris Evans nastygram to Lipstick Alley: Has Hollywood already forgotten about the Streisand effect? [Paul Alan Levy, Mike Masnick/TechDirt] Also at Public Citizen, the dispute over a boilermaker union official’s effort to unmask an online critic has now been settled (earlier);
- Interesting bank case: “Employer SLAPPed for Suing Ex-Employee” [Shaw Valenza]
Filed under: free speech in Canada, hate speech, nastygrams, online speech, Pennsylvania, Streisand effect
3 Comments
Stanley Fish’s only distinction is that he is a former postmodernist. Nothing that he has done or written suggests great knowledge of or profound thought about any issue outside the tiny and inconsequential world of literary criticism. I continue to be amazed that the New York Times affords him such a pulpit.
[…] Spotted on Overlawyered. Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. Bookmark the permalink. […]
[…] [Erica Goldberg, ConcurOp], despite repeated signals from places like Harvard Law School and the New York Times that he is a Very Serious Person whose views we need to […]