Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

krebsonsecurity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 994 posts

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#151

Post by forgetfreeman »

shermantanktop wrote: post #101
forgetfreeman wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Food for thought: elimination of basic rights impacts all citizens regardless of their political affiliation.

Similarly, expanding executive powers benefits whoever has the position, not just the guy who is in there right now. The self-defeating behavior of the legislative branch, across both parties, for decades led to the risks going up invisibly. And it turns out, risks usually go up without people noticing.

Pretty much, yeah. I hold both major political parties and their partisans responsible for the current dumpster fire in Washington, and all of the dumb shit that's preceded it over the last 40-odd years.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#152

Post by outer_web »

winter_blue wrote: post #95
twright wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On paper he can't do a lot of things but the amount of gutting and cutting that's happened in the last two(!) months makes one realize the laws aren't worth the paper they're written on without a proactive congress interested in keeping the executive in check. Suspending birthright citizenship as established in the 14th amendment is a big one that "he can't do." Challenges to E.O. 14160 are going through the courts r…

The scotus would need to strike down the 22nd amendment. Even with as horribly morally bankrupt of a scotus as we have now, I don’t think they’d sink to the low of striking down the 22nd.

I don't believe scotus can invalidate an amendment. The best they can do is interpret it in a way that allows a third term.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#153

Post by slowhadoken »

paulgb wrote: post #131
slowhadoken wrote: post #97

I can’t remember anyone respecting mainstream US news for the last 30+ years. Aren’t most news agencies, directly or indirectly, owned by BlackRock, State Street, or the Vanguard Group? That’s a real question.

Those companies run ETFs. They “own” lots of companies because they sell broad market funds to basically every passive investor in America.

That sounds like a yes. Larry Fink famously announced that “you have to force behaviors” when describing how ESG is tied into investments proving he has weight to throw around.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#154

Post by tombert »

timewizard wrote: post #125
Afforess wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voting is the minimum of civic duty, not the maximum.

Voting is not a civic duty. I have every right NOT to vote. It's my voice and I can use it as I please. Forcing me into a ballot box to pick between two awful choices is not civilized.

I didn't force you to do anything. No one did. I'm just judging you.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#155

Post by discordance »

winter_blue wrote: post #86
nine_zeros wrote: post #46

I find it remarkable that Americans are ok with rule by executive order instead of rule by congressional law. I also find it fascinating that no federal judge has held any Trump administration officers in contempt or imposed sanctions/bans on officers who are continuously hurting constitutional rights. I assume that Americans have been sleeping at the wheel, unaware of the threat of slide into fascism. But is the vot…

It might be better to say “Republicans” instead of “Americans” as you do. Americans are a deeply divided group of people: one-third republicans, one-third democrats, and one-third apathetic. The one-third of Americans who are republicans put Trump in power, and are indirectly responsible for what’s happening — and the vast majority of them of course wholeheartedly fully support these violations of the First Amendment…

Divided they might be, but unfortunately Americans share one president who is acting on their behalf.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#156

Post by ripped_britches »

carterschonwald wrote: post #24

As best I can tell, the simplest way to fight back via legal channels sans unlimited legal budget is to run for office. Like I’m seriously trying to figure out if that’s a sane option for me despite my total disregard and distrust of authority. Also my distinctly aggressive distaste for bullies, traditions or bullshit.

> distinctly aggressive distaste for bullies

Good luck with that

Just messing, I really hope genuinely good people run for office instead of LBJ type bullies

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#157

Post by mattnewton »

timewizard wrote: post #132
mattnewton wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did people get deported for that? The article has plenty of examples that go well beyond calling things “disinformation”

Wrong question. The question is "were peoples civil rights ignored because of that?" In both cases: YES.

Calling things disinformation is not analogous to deporting people and threatening to withhold funds from colleges that don’t crack down on speech the government doesn’t like hard enough; I’m not claiming there was no civil liberty violated by any previous administration, I am claiming this is a serious escalation of a new kind of attack on the first amendment.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#158

Post by [deleted] »

andreygrehov wrote: post #83
sorcerer-mar wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on the content of the op-eds they wrote? That's awful Or are you just referring to the more normal (yet still awful) concept of a draft?

I don't think this is normal: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Y0iiww5KFTg

[deleted]

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#159

Post by BrenBarn »

nine_zeros wrote: post #46

I find it remarkable that Americans are ok with rule by executive order instead of rule by congressional law. I also find it fascinating that no federal judge has held any Trump administration officers in contempt or imposed sanctions/bans on officers who are continuously hurting constitutional rights. I assume that Americans have been sleeping at the wheel, unaware of the threat of slide into fascism. But is the vot…

Executive order vs. legislation is a meaningless distinction to most people. What most people care about is what they or someone else can get in trouble for and what consequences they will face, and more generally just how good they perceive their life to be. It's like trying to distinguish between two diseases with long latinate names; what matters is how sick you feel and what treatment will stop it.

Insofar as people do care, I think many people actually prefer executive order-style action because they perceive it as swifter, more direct, and less tied up in debate, dithering, and red tape.

But mostly what people care about is just "are things happening the way I want them to happen". If yes, they won't care about the mechanism that produced that; if no, they will blame whoever they perceive to be responsible, whether or not they actually are.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#160

Post by smw »

winter_blue wrote: post #95
twright wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On paper he can't do a lot of things but the amount of gutting and cutting that's happened in the last two(!) months makes one realize the laws aren't worth the paper they're written on without a proactive congress interested in keeping the executive in check. Suspending birthright citizenship as established in the 14th amendment is a big one that "he can't do." Challenges to E.O. 14160 are going through the courts r…

The scotus would need to strike down the 22nd amendment. Even with as horribly morally bankrupt of a scotus as we have now, I don’t think they’d sink to the low of striking down the 22nd.

He was already ineligible this election based on the 14th amendment, but SCOTUS bailed him out.
Post reply on HN