Does it depend on the type of rule? If Govt required Facebook, etc., to help voters detect disinformation, rather than banning it, that kind of careful tailoring might survive the kind of scrutiny SCOTUS uses in Mansky. At least it would get the Court's respectful attention.
-
-
-
I agree (and argue in Cheap Speech) that such a law should be constitutional. I just don't think Mansky does much to help on that score.
-
I think it helps on tone & general judicial methodology. I read tone of Alvarez plurality as much more hostile to Govt interference with marketplace of ideas. I read Mansky tone as much more sympathetic to Govt regs that structure democratic deliberation w/o unneeded speech bans.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yes and this Court is decades past reading any free speech case, any at all, narrowly, unless maybe pro-choice speech is involved, we will see.
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.