A right-wing #SCOTUS has now agreed to hear a case that could literally change the 26 words that created the internet.
-
The internet will be a much different place if the Supreme Court strikes down Section 230. ➡️ (podcast)
- slate.com/podcasts/what-… ⬅️ @jkosseff via @Slate#1A
Section 230 effects social media, blogs, image sharing, forums and comment sections — any service that enables users to submit content. Literally every online platform that allows users to post information, share content, and comment relies on Section 230.
Sec. 230 ... is regarded as “the most important law in tech” because it encourages investment and innovation on the Internet by providing legal certainty to services that they will not be held liable for the speech or actions of third parties.'
Here are those 26 words, Section 230, Communication Decency Act, passed by Congress in 1996.
"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider"
"... 1969, in Brandenberg v. Ohio, the Supreme Court struck down the conviction of a Ku Klux Klan member, and established a new standard: Speech can be suppressed only if it is intended, and likely to produce, "imminent lawless action." - @ACLU
2/🧵
"Otherwise, even speech that advocates violence is protected. The Brandenberg standard prevails today."
Free speech door swings both ways. I know someone is going to mention Fairness Doctrine, so I'll do that as 4/ and explain what it was, which most don't know, from a .gov attorney and why it doesn't apply.
Imagine DeSantis in charge of the .gov agency deciding 'fake news'.
" ... DOJ says that it executed a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago to protect critical nuclear weapons and signals intelligence documents, but Donald Trump's new defense is that the entire world is already free to view the documents."
-
Tell us where DOJ said nuclear weapons?
2/
Bombshell report. This is a little exercise in helping you all spot shoddy journalism - even if if turns out to be unsealed and true. Trying to help you spot it.
This is r.e. my earlier thread today, which I'll link later.
At Manchin’s urging, though, it would require the government to offer oil & gas leases on federal land and in the Gulf of Mexico, albeit at a higher royalty rate. It also provides tax incentives for projects that capture carbon dioxide and new forms of energy like hydrogen.”
3/
- @AP The bill would impose a new fee on excess methane emissions from oil and gas drilling while giving fossil fuel companies access to more leases on federal lands and waters.” apnews.com/article/4d5d40…