I appreciate the spirit of this but I don’t think it’s legally defensible in the long run in America particularly with the way the courts have tended toward an expansionist View of 1a. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/06/19/supreme-court-unanimously-reaffirms-there-is-no-hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/ …https://twitter.com/kimmaicutler/status/1029854853483229184?s=21 …
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
I can make lots of recs on Sec 230 stuff. . . But I do think I give a nice redux in the beginning of my piece & set up the issues between that and the 1A. FWIW, your thoughts on company norms is dead on ;) and part of the problem.
- 4 more replies
-
-
-
if you wanted to operate something like what
@aprilaser is referencing above, it would probably have to be in a country where their legal norms around speech already align with her perspective on racist speechThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I struggled for a long time with the comparison to Pruneyard -- which is the shopping mall case. Privately owned space, but often as big/run like a small town. . . what are your speech rights? But I increasingly think broadcast cases like Red Lion will be where the law is made
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.