Florida Bill Will Ban Censorship

[WuWei]

@hwyflier

But you can’t force me to host the website for it.

Is it a public accommodation?

[Ceasar]

@vaard

@zantax

@vaard

it is interesting that hannity does not suggest to trump to make an account here…

he would be completely uncensored…

i wonder why he hasnt or if he has why trump wouldnt…

You know why, because he would have a hard time finding someone to host the site or process payments for anything sold on it. Realized I don’t know if they sell anything around here.

i never saw anything for sale on twitter…

why would he need anyone to host a site? what is stopping him from buying some servers and hosting his own site?

isnt they guy a billionare?

I think he’s going to do much more than just that…

[PurpnGold]

@WuWei

Is it a public accommodation?

Maybe…

Is being a conservative or terrorist breeding ground a protected class?

[WuWei]

@PurpnGold

@WuWei

Is it a public accommodation?

Maybe…

Is being a conservative or terrorist breeding ground a protected class?

Citizen is.

I love how you default to “class” now.

[wonderingrover]

@Ceasar

@wonderingrover

So the GOP is now for big government regulation? My how things have changed since I departed the GOP.

No, we are for freedom of speech & are anti trust.

Freedom of speech does not equate to freedom from the consequences of that speech. If you type something that is against the TOS of a platform that you are using, they have every right to enforce the contract you agreed to when you joined said platform - just as this forum (as an example) does.

[PurpnGold]

@WuWei

Citizen is.

I love how you default to “class” now.

When talking about public accommodation law… you betcha.

AWS definitely isn’t a public accommodation. Twitter likely is.

[zantax]

@wonderingrover

@Ceasar

@wonderingrover

So the GOP is now for big government regulation? My how things have changed since I departed the GOP.

No, we are for freedom of speech & are anti trust.

Freedom of speech does not equate to freedom from the consequences of that speech. If you type something that is against the TOS of a platform that you are using, they have every right to enforce the contract you agreed to when you joined said platform - just as this forum (as an example) does.

Government regulates what is legally enforceable in contracts routinely. Ask Elizabeth Warren.

[WuWei]

@PurpnGold

@WuWei

Citizen is.

I love how you default to “class” now.

When talking about public accommodation law… you betcha.

AWS definitely isn’t a public accommodation. Twitter likely is.

Easy to do when one’s class is the protected class.

I don’t know what AWS is.

[zantax]

@SottoVoce

@zantax

@SottoVoce

@zantax

Let’s examine Floridas constitution on speech in comparison to the federal one

Florida

Text of Section 4:

Freedom of Speech and Press

Every person may speak, write and publish sentiments on all subjects but shall be responsible for the abuse of that right. No law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press. In all criminal prosecutions and civil actions for defamation the truth may be given in evidence. If the matter charged as defamatory is true and was published with good motives, the party shall be acquitted or exonerated

Federal

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Highlighted the relevant difference, our first amendment does not recognize a general right to speech, only prohibits government from infringing on it. Theirs, does.

Doctrine of preemption, Supremacy Clause.

Federal law preempts state law. Citizens United says private entities/corporations have first amendment rights. MCAC vs Halleck says first amendment restraints don’t extend to private entities.

Private entities/corporations have first amendment rights and first amendment restraints don’t extend to private entities/corporations. There are two Supreme Court (federal) rulings which would preempt any state constitution/state law to the opposite.

I find it ironic that both of the SCOTUS cases prohibiting this were ruled 5-4 by the conservative majority. It’s also ironic that corporate personhood, the same conservative championed statute that allowed Hobby Lobby to pick and choose the healthcare it gives to its employees (Religious Freedom Restoration Act), would be another nail in the coffin for this.

They aren’t using the federal first amendment, nor are they restricting speech. Doesn’t matter one whit what the court has to say about whether the first amendment is applicable.

It doesn’t matter what workaround they are trying to use. The social media/private entity/corporation would take the state to federal court citing any of those cases. They are restricting the speech of the corporation.

Nope, I would imagine their rebuttal would be based on the takings clause. Not the first amendment, because it isn’t applicable. This isn’t government restricting speech, it’s government protecting speech. Oh and the takings clause won’t save them either, been a very long time since courts said government can’t regulate business practices based on that. They are publicly traded companies and subject to regulation.

[PurpnGold]

@WuWei

Easy to do when one’s class is the protected class.

You are protected to… based on religion and sex

@WuWei

I don’t know what AWS is.

Amazon cloud. It was hosting Parler.

[PurpnGold]

@zantax

This isn’t government restricting speech, it’s government protecting speech. Oh and the takings clause won’t save them either, been a very long time since courts said government can’t regulate business practices based on that. They are publicly traded companies and subject to regulation.

Will the government allow me to scream cuss words in the middle of Walmart too?

After all… it’s just protecting my speech

[WuWei]

@PurpnGold

You are protected to… based on religion and sex

No I’m not.

@PurpnGold

Amazon cloud. It was hosting Parler.

Thanks.

[WuWei]

@PurpnGold

@zantax

This isn’t government restricting speech, it’s government protecting speech. Oh and the takings clause won’t save them either, been a very long time since courts said government can’t regulate business practices based on that. They are publicly traded companies and subject to regulation.

Will the government allow me to scream cuss words in the middle of Walmart too?

After all… it’s just protecting my speech

Will government force Walmart to bake you a wedding cake for a homosexual wedding?

[zantax]

@PurpnGold

@zantax

This isn’t government restricting speech, it’s government protecting speech. Oh and the takings clause won’t save them either, been a very long time since courts said government can’t regulate business practices based on that. They are publicly traded companies and subject to regulation.

Will the government allow me to scream cuss words in the middle of Walmart too?

After all… it’s just protecting my speech

No, because obscenities aren’t protected speech, it isn’t political speech in this bill. They carved out exceptions here, allowing them to remove content that was obscene.

[PurpnGold]

@WuWei

No I’m not.

You don’t have a religion?

[PurpnGold]

@zantax

No, because obscenities aren’t protected speech, it isn’t political speech in this bill. They carved out exceptions here, allowing them to remove content that was obscene.

Can the government force Walmart to allow me to scream the star spangle banner in the middle of checkout?

[zantax]

@PurpnGold

@zantax

No, because obscenities aren’t protected speech, it isn’t political speech in this bill. They carved out exceptions here, allowing them to remove content that was obscene.

Can the government force Walmart to allow me to scream the star bangles banner in the middle of checkout?

See Pruneyard.

[conan]

Is you’re political believes being banned?

[PurpnGold]

@zantax

See Pruneyard.

So Walmart can’t kick me out for being a disturbance?

[vaard]

@WuWei

@hwyflier

But you can’t force me to host the website for it.

Is it a public accommodation?

At what point do local public accommodation laws apply?

Can i gamble online at a foreign hosted site?