This is incredibly disappointing coming from someone like Geoffrey Stone, who knows perfectly well that the Fairness Doctrine was only constitutional because broadcast spectrum is scarce, and that it could not have applied to cable/internet.
For shame.
post-gazette.com/news/insight/2…
For shame.
post-gazette.com/news/insight/2…
At best this is oversimplification to the point of being misleading.
At worst, it is downright dishonest.
At worst, it is downright dishonest.
Stone also cites to dicta in Marsh v. Alabama, but doesn't tell readers that private entities are only state actors for First Amendment purposes when they perform functions traditionally & exclusively exercised by the state.
Oh, and that SCOTUS recently rejected this argument.
Oh, and that SCOTUS recently rejected this argument.
Geoff Stone may be a respected constitutional scholar on the whole, but this op-ed could have used some peer review, or...you know...cite checking.
Next up, probably: "there is an exception to the First Amendment for incitement to imminent lawless action, so maybe we should consider outlawing incitement to anything else we don't like"
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
