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

481–490 of 994 posts

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

#481

Post by donatj »

ooterness wrote: post #413
donatj wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances Read that, please. I'd consider myself a free speech absolutist and I don't really agree. I feel like most of the list falls into "bad legal takes…

> Meanwhile, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents have been detaining and trying to deport pro-Palestinian students who are legally in the United States. The administration is targeting students and academics who spoke out against Israel’s attacks on Gaza, or who were active in campus protests against U.S. support for the attacks. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters Thursday that at least 3…

I've got very mixed feelings on that.

I'm not entirely sure that someone should be able to come into another country as a non-citizen and go around drumming up support for our foreign enemies. I can tell you no other country on Earth would put up with that.

Whether or not the first amendment applies to non-citizens, especially non-permanent residents is clearly hotly debated. I can see both sides of it.

The almost perfectly clean split across the Federalist/Democratic-Republican line that the founders had on the Alien and Sedition Act I think makes pretty clear that even the founders didn't agree on whether or not it did.

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

#482

Post by TOMDM »

al_borland wrote: post #360
esalman wrote: post #184

It started with the Free Palestine protesters. Tesla protesters are next. Citizens will be shipped to El Salvador, non-citizens to where they came from.

What many of them are doing isn’t a legally protected form of protesting. Free Palestine protesters have been shutting down roads with their protests, this is illegal. Tesla protesters are vandalizing the vehicles of private citizens and burning down dealerships. This is also illegal, and due to its political goals, it seems to fit the textbook definition of terrorism. > the calculated use of violence (or the threat…

If someone is breaking the law, they should be charged with a crime.

How are we at the point where that statement is a partisan issue?

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

#483

Post by kopirgan »

tw04 wrote: post #449
kopirgan wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't it the other way around for way too long and still is in places like UK, Germany?!

The UK and Germany don’t and never have had the 1st amendment. As for “the other way around” - what I saw the right wing complaining about was “being canceled”. Freedom of speech has never meant freedom from consequences for your actions. A private business is well within their rights to fire you if you’re posting racist or homophonic slurs online. The only thing the first amendment provides is freedom from the gover…

Going by your logic, pulling funds by govt is wrong but students "facing consequences of actions" by getting expelled is ok?

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

#484

Post by facile3232 »

cvz wrote: post #474
facile3232 wrote: post #376

I don't really care, tbh. There are better rights to fight for: food, shelter, education, healthcare. If said freedom of speech had been to be used to fight for materially meaningful rights, I'd be a big fan. Most Americans never bothered to use the right in any way that improved this country. You don't use it, you lose it. As it stands most people associate it with the right to behave like a dick in public.

The reason you don't see "free speech" used for those causes isn't because they don't rely on free speech. It's because advocacy for them is so clearly protected as free speech that it isn't even a question. There have been times when that protection was a question in the U.S., like when protesting wars or segregation laws. Without the right to say something, there is no legal way to organize or to demand any other r…

> Without the right to say something, there is no legal way to organize or to demand any other right.

Americans don't do this, though. They don't demand better. They accept shitty governance and say "at least I voted". And frankly I don't think they ever will.

So I say, fuck it, let's just all accept that government is shitty and mostly exists to squeeze us for money. We can finally stop acting like it's representative of us. When y'all finally have had enough riots will work just as fine as they did before.

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

#485

Post by esalman »

outside1234 wrote: post #279
esalman wrote: post #184

It started with the Free Palestine protesters. Tesla protesters are next. Citizens will be shipped to El Salvador, non-citizens to where they came from.

Not if we protest en mass and all stick together. The thing that will kill us is if we obey in advance and don’t do these things.

As far as I can see nobody is sticking by the F1 students who are being deported.

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

#486

Post by danavar »

harry8 wrote: post #353

Now might be a good time to revisit the twitter files and really try to understand what was in them and why it was horrifying. Seems many people wanted to pretend they were nothing because it didn't suit their partisan narrative. We're seeing the same kinds of justification now just with different partisans. If we don't call out abuses by our own tribe (whichever that is), maybe we're part of the attack.

Exactly. Let's not forget the real attempts at the government's internet censorship of previous administrations. Nobody seemed to care about that then.

Like give me a break. The previous admin took steps towards censoring real information that would be politically harmful to them, and now we're supposed to feel bad about the current admin who is taking productive steps against antagonist agents within our country?

I get that the law in this country is pliable and a nuanced subject but I'd rather deal with the latter issue - where our government is challenging the boundaries of the 1st amendment against our own enemies rather than their own people lol

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

#487

Post by girvo »

milesrout wrote: post #405
sapphicsnail wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have yet to see a free speech absolutist express concern about the government and media suppressing Gaza protestors or LGBTQ books being banned or anything else that affects the left. Doesn't seem very principled to me.

Nobody is banning books. Removing inappropriate material from school libraries isn't book banning. Have you seen some of the books that are being removed? That books with graphic depictions of aren't appropriate for children is a view perfectly compatible with strong support for freedom of expression.

> Have you seen some of the books that are being removed?

Yes, and most of them do not fit your description in the slightest.

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

#488

Post by Raed667 »

whatever1 wrote: post #268

As a European for decades in the US, it is the first time in my life that I feel fear for expressing my opinions. Ps does HN offer the capability of completely deleting the account and all of the comments ?

HN is archived by tens of 3rd party DBs (for better or worse) so requesting a full deletion is a step but it won’t scrub everything

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

#489

Post by croes »

slibhb wrote: post #257
p1necone wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not really convinced more than a vanishingly small percentage of people who self identify as "free speech absolutists" are using that term in good faith. Freedom of speech is just the easiest way to have plausible deniability when directly or indirectly defending otherwise indefensible positions. Anecdotally I've noticed these sorts of people much less often, at least on here as of late. Methinks their deniabilit…

> Freedom of speech is just the easiest way to have plausible deniability when directly or indirectly defending otherwise indefensible positions. The idea that it's somehow suspicious to be in favor of free speech has got to be one of the worst developments in American politics. And, for whatever it's worth, every vocal "free speech person" I know doesn't like the current administation. Some people actually just have…

A what do they when they don’t like it?

The once who claimed there is a speech police implement speech police and all what the vocal free speech persons do is don’t like it?

Did the address it at the president or do they fear consequences?

Post reply on HN