Politics | Still not resubscribing to your paper

By EldritchTrapStar Go To Post"The subject was shot 100 times, but the fire is what killed him." - American Proverb

By You got 14 bricks right there? Go To Post

https://twitter.com/JamesTCarterII/status/1761964248912277674?t=lbk-NbBhJcwmJrBQEIURuA&s=19

By DY_nasty Go To PostHis supervisor has also been named a person of interest in an ongoing investigation.

The Supreme Court is hearing arguments in a pair of cases that could fundamentally change discourse on the internet by defining, for the first time, what rights social media companies have to limit what their users can post.

The court’s decision, expected by June, will almost certainly be its most important statement on the scope of the First Amendment in the internet era, and it will have major political and economic implications. A ruling that tech platforms like Facebook, YouTube and TikTok have no editorial discretion to decide what posts to allow would expose users to a greater variety of viewpoints but almost certainly amplify the ugliest aspects of the digital age, including hate speech and disinformation.

The laws, from Florida and Texas, differ in their details. Florida’s prevents the platforms from permanently barring candidates for political office in the state while Texas’ prohibits the platforms from removing any content based on a user’s viewpoint. “To generalize just a bit,” Judge Andrew S. Oldham wrote in a decision upholding the Texas law, the Florida law “prohibits all censorship of some speakers,” while the one from Texas “prohibits some censorship of all speakers” when based on the views they express.

Justice Samuel Alito asks if content moderation is a euphemism for censorship. Clement says if the government does it, it’s censorship. If a private party does it, it’s editorial discretion.

By EldritchTrapStar Go To PostWould this usually be protocol, for something like this? To investigate a supervisor or the like?

After Justice Alito voices concern about which case law the court should be analogizing to, Clement quickly responds: “This isn’t the first time you’re wrestling with the internet.” He argues the social media companies are more like a newspaper or a parade organizer than a common carrier.

“If YouTube were a newspaper, how much would it weigh?” Alito quips back.

Paul Clement, arguing on behalf of NetChoice, says a provision of the Texas law requiring neutrality and barring viewpoint discrimination would be a formula for making social media platforms unattractive to users and advertisers. If they allow content about suicide prevention and “pro-Semitic” content, they would have to also allow pro-suicide and antisemitic content. So were the law to be enforced, they would probably “eliminate certain areas” entirely.

Nielson now begins to argue in defense of the Texas law. He opens by comparing social media to telegraphs, which were not allowed to discriminate in what they transmitted.

Aaron Nielson, the Texas solicitor general, says that if Texas lacks the constitutional authority to regulate social media platforms, it would be “Lochner 2.0.” He is referring to the 1905 case Lochner v. New York, which struck down a state law prohibiting maximum working hours for bakers. During that era, a conservative Supreme Court repeatedly struck down laws attempting to regulate business, culminating in a judicial and political crisis during the Depression and New Deal when the court stopped standing in the way of such laws.

Justice Kavanaugh asks how the Texas law against viewpoint discrimination would apply to speech endorsing or promoting terrorism. Aaron Nielson, the Texas solicitor general, suggests that instead of saying “you can have anti-Al Qaeda but not the pro-Al Qaeda, if you just want to say ‘nobody is talking about Al Qaeda here,’ they can turn that off.”

By FortuneFaded Go To Post

https://x.com/nypost/status/1761123654740394392?s=20

She fucked his brains out

By Patriotism Go To PostI imagine they'll be asked if they support hamas

By Perfect Blue Go To Post

https://x.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1761767593226961365?s=20

By Laboured Go To PostSomehow this kind of thing keeps happening.

https://x.com/EdConwaySky/status/1762437167911973110?s=20

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) delivered a stern message to his House GOP colleagues Monday afternoon, warning them that shutting down the government is not an option.
“Shutting down the government is harmful to the country. And it never produces positive outcomes — on policy or politics,” he warned on the Senate floor.

By Laboured Go To PostSomehow this kind of thing keeps happening.

https://x.com/EdConwaySky/status/1762437167911973110?s=20

By Patriotism Go To PostYeh mine went up 25% this year

Ridiculous

The conservative parents’ group met Monday night at Howard’s Central Branch library in Columbia to brainstorm how they could get books they deemed inappropriate out of their children’s school libraries. Their guest speaker for the evening was Jessica Garland, who led a successful book-removal campaign in Carroll County. The Howard chapter wanted the playbook.

The chair of the chapter, Lisa Geraghty, knew protesters were coming, but anticipated only a few dozen. However, the meeting room was flooded with protesters in the seats, on the floor and standing along the walls. Geraghty and Garland were heckled throughout their speeches and a librarian warned the audience not to yell during the presentation.

By DY_nasty Go To PostAbsolutely

For a lot of different reasons too. A uniformed soldier doing political performative anything is already a big deal. Add in the fact he live streamed it, it turned into an eventual suicide/loss of life, the scope of enablers involved and the question of him potentially using accesses granted by his position to get that far all come into question. And whatever warning signs were missed if any as well as the discussion spaces he was in that created the choice.

His direct supervisor and commander are fucked. And his entire corner of the military will be answering a ton of questions for next few years too.

By Patriotism Go To PostYeh mine went up 25% this year

Ridiculous

Both chambers of the Virginia General Assembly have passed bills that would eliminate unusual tax exemptions for a prominent Confederate heritage group with long ties to the state, presenting a difficult decision for Gov. Glenn Youngkin.

At issue is legislation that would remove tax exemptions for the marble-clad headquarters of the United Daughters of the Confederacy, a group that was founded in 1894 for women who descended from Confederate soldiers and has long been central to Virginia’s culture wars over Confederate heritage and the state’s racial history.

By Batong Go To PostTime to sell it and just go on your bike

By EldritchTrapStar Go To Posthttps://www.thebaltimorebanner.com/education/k-12-schools/moms-for-liberty-howard-county-book-removal-TSJHK5JPYVBBPP3P7IZRFL4SSQ/


I'm glad they're not just ignoring this hateful ass group and letting them rock.

Howard County Public schools board members aren't listening to their asses either. Just need to keep these clowns from joining the ranks and dictating policy.

I'm not surprised to see that they had success in Carroll County.

Next, Kavanaugh called the states out for trying to turn the First Amendment upside down. “In your opening remarks,” he told Florida’s solicitor general, “you said the design of the First Amendment is to prevent ‘suppression of speech.’ And you left out…three words…, by the government.” When the government boots you from its public forum, that’s (often) a First Amendment violation. When a private platform boots you from its service, that’s its right to free speech and free association in action.

By reilo Go To PostWhen even Kavanaugh is on the right side of history…

By KimoSan Go To PostI guess he's doing his best. 🫤

By reilo Go To PostTake that, you fuck