free speech – Overlawyered

Free speech roundup

Walter Olson — Fri, 15 May 2020 10:29:43 +0000

“To no one’s surprise, Hungary’s coronavirus emergency bill — which criminalizes fake news — has already resulted in police detaining and questioning social media users who criticize Orbán.” [Sarah McLaughlin] “Part of the powers granted to the government by the coronavirus authorization act is the ability to criminally prosecute the spreading of false news which inhibits the ability of authorities to defend against the pandemic. András recalled that the police arrived at his home at 6 a.m. with a search warrant.” [Insight Hungary 444]
The more you know about past abuses under the former FCC public interest standard, the less sanguine you will be about inviting the government to regulate the fairness of social media platforms [John Samples and Paul Matzko]
“China-Style Internet Control Is One of the Worst Ideas for Solving Coronavirus” [Ilya Shapiro] “China’s cybersecurity administration [earlier this year] implemented a set of new regulations on the governance of the ‘online information content ecosystem’ that encourage ‘positive’ content while barring material deemed ‘negative’ or illegal.” [Lily Kuo, The Guardian]
San Antonio council’s anti-hate-speech resolution had a lot of ill-advised content but managed to stop short of overstepping the First Amendment itself [Taylor Millard, Hot Air]
We reported on SEC gag orders last year (more: Robert McNamara) and now the New Civil Liberties Alliance is in court to challenge another one [Peggy Little, NCLA on SEC v. Romeril]
Once censorship to regulate “online harms” gets its foothold the topics of its meddlesome ambition will expand [Charles Hymas on demands in Britain that “body shaming” in social media be subject to legal sanction]

Tags: free speech, online speech, Securities and Exchange Commission, social media

Free speech roundup is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Free speech roundup

Walter Olson — Mon, 20 Apr 2020 10:15:20 +0000

“New Puerto Rico law threatens jail time for spreading ‘false information’ about COVID-19” [Committee to Protect Journalists, earlier] Freedom for publishers and platforms to associate with whomever they want permits them to exclude quackery and health misinformation, and that’s a feature not a bug [Matthew Feeney]
It takes the FCC all of one day to reject petition from absurdly named pressure group Free Press demanding broadcast limits on statements by Trump and his allies about the novel coronavirus [Robby Soave, Eugene Volokh] Obscure West Coast group sues Fox over its coronavirus coverage [Volokh] Meanwhile, Trump camp is at it again: “Trump Campaign Sues TV Station for Running ‘Defamatory’ Coronavirus Attack Ad” [C.J. Ciaramella, earlier]
“A Teenager Posted About Her COVID-19 Infection on Instagram. A Deputy Threatened To Arrest Her If She Didn’t Delete It.” [Scott Shackford; Oxford, Wis.]
Technical countermeasures, as opposed to calling in the cops, most practical way to fend off that new form of anti-social activity, “Zoom-bombing” [Eugene Volokh]
“How the Telephone Consumer Protection Act Unconstitutionally Privileges Government Speech” [Trevor Burrus on Cato amicus brief in Supreme Court case of Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants]
From before the crisis, hate speech mini-roundup: Connecticut state agency sees it as part of its mission to defend an unconstitutional “racial ridicule” law enacted in 1917 [Volokh] “Hundreds of Scots who tell ‘offensive jokes’ on social media are being secretly logged on police database” [Ruth Warrander, Scottish Sun] Bad proposal in U.K. to give communications regulator authority to address material that “is not illegal but has the potential to cause harm.” [Matt Kilcoyne] Social media regulation: “No one is saying freedom of speech must be limited,“ says New York lawmaker filing bill to limit the freedom of speech [Sen. David Carlucci]

Tags: Connecticut, COVID-19 virus, Federal Communications Commission, free speech, hate speech, social media

Free speech roundup is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

COVID-19 pandemic roundup

Walter Olson — Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:05:00 +0000

“On free speech in and after pandemics, the United States demonstrates the right approach and China the wrong — in fact not just wrong but deadly.” [my new post at Cato]
“Can the Government Just Close My Favorite Bar?” [Keith Whittington on the “police power” in constitutional law; similarly Elizabeth Joh via libertarian legal scholar Randy Barnett]
“Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong have brought outbreaks under control — and without resorting to China’s draconian measures.” [Benjamin J. Cowling and Wey Wen Lim, New York Times]
“Stop It With the Coronavirus Curfews Already” [Matt Welch]
House-passed bill includes liability protection for medical mask makers [Michael Carroll, Legal Newsline; Steven Nelson, New York Post; earlier]
How to answer the glib one-liner “There are no libertarians in a pandemic”? [Bonnie Kristian, The Week; Keith Whittington] Turn it around: “There are only libertarians in a pandemic.” [Nick Gillespie]

Tags: China, constitutional law, COVID-19 virus, free speech, medical

COVID-19 pandemic roundup is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

State lawmakers introduce anti-free-speech bills as a “courtesy.” Courtesy to whom?

Walter Olson — Thu, 12 Mar 2020 04:05:37 +0000

“The executive director of the [Rhode Island] ACLU called the bill a ‘direct attack’ on press freedom, while the head of the newspaper association called it ‘laughable and frightening.'” So how’d it get introduced? My Tuesday piece at Cato inquires.

Tags: free speech, legislature, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, WO writings

State lawmakers introduce anti-free-speech bills as a “courtesy.” Courtesy to whom? is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Free speech roundup

Walter Olson — Mon, 02 Mar 2020 10:59:59 +0000

“‘Hate speech’ is not a legal category, and banning it wouldn’t stand up to scrutiny.” [Cato Daily Podcast episodes with Caleb Brown interviewing Matthew Feeney and Lou Perez]
“Civil FOSTA Suits Start Showing Up In Court; Prove That FOSTA Supporters Were 100% Wrong About Who Would Be Targeted” [Mike Masnick, TechDirt, earlier]
Cause célèbre in the U.K.: employment law tribunal, an institution with no exact counterpart in American law, rules against worker fired from nonprofit over tweets expressing view that sex is immutable biological characteristic [Owen Bowcott, The Guardian; Jodie Ginsberg (chief executive of Index on Censorship group]
California attorney general’s office demands donor lists of non-profits, including those out of state. Supreme Court should now clarify its doctrine that all laws infringing on First Amendment freedoms be narrowly tailored [Ilya Shapiro, Trevor Burrus, and James Knight on Cato certiorari amicus brief in Institute for Free Speech v. Becerra; earlier and related here, here, etc.]
Trump sues the New York Times for libel over a Max Frankel op-ed and Eric Turkewitz doesn’t think much of his prospects [earlier]
“Was This the Decade We Hit Peak Free Speech?” [Jesse Walker]

Tags: Donald Trump, free speech, hate speech, New York Times, transgender, United Kingdom

Free speech roundup is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Ninth Circuit panel: YouTube isn’t a state actor

Walter Olson — Sat, 29 Feb 2020 16:58:29 +0000

Everyone knew this was the state of the law, and highly unlikely to change, but conservative commentator Dennis Prager had many of his followers hoping otherwise. A Ninth Circuit panel has now ruled that YouTube is not a state actor and that its marketing of itself as a forum featuring diverse viewpoints was opinion and not false advertising. [Nancy Scola, Politico; Eugene Volokh; Prager University v. Google; earlier (many channels not identified with conservative ideas saw far higher shares of their content placed in parental-control category than did Prager); Jonathon Hauerschild, American Legislative Exchange Council last January (YouTube not “public forum” for legal purposes)]

Tags: First Amendment, free speech, YouTube

Ninth Circuit panel: YouTube isn’t a state actor is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

“Punching down at dead cartoonists”

Walter Olson — Thu, 30 Jan 2020 05:05:52 +0000

Five years have passed since the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris. Has anything been learned? [Jacob Siegel, Tablet; our earlier coverage]

Tags: France, free speech, terrorism

“Punching down at dead cartoonists” is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Free speech roundup, campaign and political speech edition

Walter Olson — Mon, 30 Dec 2019 11:02:04 +0000

“New legislation aimed at curbing foreign influence in U.S. elections also appears to be aimed at curbing Americans’ influence in U.S. elections.” [Cato Daily Podcast with Caleb Brown and Scott Blackburn of the Institute for Free Speech on SHIELD Act]
“Everyone always talks about how much money there is in politics. This is the wrong framing. The right framing is… why is there so little money in politics?” [Scott Alexander]
Free speech advances other freedoms: “Frederick Douglass’s “Plea for Freedom of Speech in Boston”” [Law and Liberty, Kurt Lash introduction] The very idea of a gay rights organization once seemed unthinkable in America, and might have remained so “in the absence of a strong and particularly libertarian First Amendment.” [Dale Carpenter, SSRN and Volokh Conspiracy summary]
“That unlimited right to lobby the lawmakers who make decisions that affect your life, your family, and your fortune is one that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) thinks American businesses should not have.” [Peter Suderman; Bradley Smith and Luke Wachob, NRO] A federal appeals court says an independent Missouri activist doesn’t have to register as a lobbyist to talk to lawmakers [Cato Daily Podcast with Caleb Brown and Zac Morgan of the Institute for Free Speech]
“Every Democrat in the Senate Supports a Constitutional Amendment That Would Radically Curtail Freedom of Speech” [Jacob Sullum] Same bunch “Still Fundraising Off Citizens United, Still Wrong About What It Means” [Elizabeth Nolan Brown]
“Essentially, L.A. has passed a law saying people with one interest in a decision by the council can support candidates, but the other side can’t.” [Christian Britschgi, Reason on city’s ban on contributions by developer but not anti-development interests]

Tags: campaign regulation, First Amendment, free speech, lobbyists, Los Angeles

Free speech roundup, campaign and political speech edition is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Free speech roundup

Walter Olson — Mon, 16 Dec 2019 11:06:24 +0000

A new law making it a federal crime to threaten journalists? No thanks [Robby Soave, Reason]
“In 2012, there was just one journalist in jail on fake-news charges. By 2014, there were eight…. The number rose to 27 in jail by the end of last year.” And the charge can depend simply on what news the ruling authority deems true or false [Miriam Berger, Washington Post discussing new Committee to Protect Journalists report on imprisoned journalists]
Thread on the damaging impacts of COPPA, the children’s online privacy law [TechFreedom]
When are refusals to deal protected by the First Amendment? See whether your intuitions are consistent across 1) boycotts of Israel, 2) wedding cake refusals, and 3) SCOTUS’s 1982 decision in NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware [Eugene Volokh first and second posts on Arkansas challenge, David Bernstein first and second posts] My own views on anti-Israel-boycott and anti-BDS laws here, and related;
Officials in Lafayette County, Wisconsin quickly back off “completely bananas” suggestion of prosecuting news outlets that report “selectively” on water quality test results [Bruce Vielmetti, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Patrick Marley update]
Some IP claims are real killers: heirs of photographer known for famed Che Guevara image send takedown demand to maker of parody t-shirt [Paul Alan Levy]

Tags: free speech, Israel, parody

Free speech roundup is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

German court: search engines must deindex reports of 1981 double murder

Walter Olson — Thu, 05 Dec 2019 05:05:26 +0000

In case you were wondering exactly where the supposed “right to be forgotten” leads in Internet regulation:

A convicted murderer in Germany has the right to get all mention of his crime deleted from internet search results under the EU’s “right to be forgotten” provision, Germany’s highest court has ruled.

Let’s hope the United States never decides to follow Europe’s path by restricting speech rights in the name of personal data erasure. [Bill Bostock, Business Insider]

Tags: Europe, free speech, Germany, privacy, search engines

German court: search engines must deindex reports of 1981 double murder is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system