The hottest First Amendment Substack posts right now

And their main takeaways
Category
Top U.S. Politics Topics
TK News by Matt Taibbi 9902 implied HN points 18 Dec 24
  1. The Global Engagement Center (GEC) may not be shut down and could receive a one-year extension. This was part of a deal between Senate Democrats and Republicans.
  2. The GEC has been criticized for funding efforts that involved blacklisting conservative media. This issue continues to raise concerns about free speech.
  3. If the Republican party gives up on standing up for free speech, it could lead to serious consequences for voters. It's important to monitor how this situation develops.
BIG by Matt Stoller 25210 implied HN points 02 Mar 24
  1. The Supreme Court is currently considering a case involving tech giants like Google, Facebook, and Amazon and the question of whether economic regulations for these platforms are unconstitutional under the First Amendment.
  2. The case has broad societal implications, touching on antitrust, privacy, civil rights, and speech liability claims against big tech firms. The argument raised questions about the extent of tech companies' rights to make decisions like racial segregation or account deletions based on political views.
  3. The case illustrates how the influence of Robert Bork, a conservative antitrust lawyer, has shaped modern American corporate state, particularly the broad support for a society run by big tech, challenging the traditional role of democratically elected officials in regulating private tech platforms.
Popular Information 15704 implied HN points 10 Jan 24
  1. Florida school district removes dictionaries from libraries due to a law by DeSantis
  2. Over 2800 books including dictionaries and biographies have been removed from Escambia County school libraries
  3. Authors, parents, and organizations are fighting back against the book removals, alleging violations of the First Amendment
TK News by Matt Taibbi 14141 implied HN points 18 Mar 24
  1. The New York Times published a controversial piece about the Twitter Files and its connection to a Trump ally, which the author argues is a misrepresentation of reality.
  2. The Supreme Court case _Murthy v. Missouri_ is significant, as it involves challenges to government monitoring of online content and potential infringement on First Amendment rights.
  3. The article discusses the implications of exposing censorship programs and suggests a potential motive behind the Times' piece as a distraction tactic during the historic case.
TK News by Matt Taibbi 9811 implied HN points 15 Mar 24
  1. Public opinion on the TikTok ban has shifted from strong support to opposition over time.
  2. The passage of the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act has raised concerns about potential overreach in granting new powers to the President.
  3. There are worries that the bill could have implications beyond TikTok, leading to broader speech controls and threats to freedom of expression.
Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:
Human Flourishing 2122 implied HN points 08 Feb 24
  1. Governments throughout history have tried to control speech and communication channels.
  2. Technological advancements have made censorship more personal and affect the tools we use every day.
  3. The outcome of Missouri v. Biden case in 2024 will determine the scope of government censorship and impact fundamental rights.
Human Flourishing 4186 implied HN points 05 Jul 23
  1. Yesterday a major blow was landed against government censorship in court.
  2. The court granted a temporary injunction in Missouri v. Biden, limiting government officials' communication with social media companies.
  3. The ruling suggested a massive attack on free speech and described government actions as potentially unconstitutional.
Human Flourishing 3832 implied HN points 27 Mar 23
  1. The court ruled that the case challenging the federal Censorship-Industrial Complex will proceed to trial.
  2. The judge found evidence that government's censorship activities constituted state action in violation of the First Amendment.
  3. Plaintiffs successfully argued against the government's claims of sovereign immunity and lack of standing, moving the case forward.
Peter Navarro's Taking Back Trump's America 2417 implied HN points 17 Apr 23
  1. The lawsuit against Fox News had a chilling effect on free speech by intimidating people from speaking out.
  2. Fox News failed to investigate voting machine tampering allegations, which may have weakened their defense.
  3. The lawsuit may lead Fox to settle, setting a precedent that lawsuits can silence news organizations.
The Dossier 2214 implied HN points 12 Jan 24
  1. A New York Times journalist quit Substack because he couldn't censor what he considered 'hate speech' and 'extremism'.
  2. Substack stayed true to its mission by refusing to engage in censorship, even under pressure from major publications.
  3. The situation highlights the importance of free speech and the dangers of censorship in shaping narratives and promoting government control.
COVID Reason 3588 implied HN points 04 Jul 23
  1. A judge issued a significant injunction against the government in Missouri v. Biden case on the 4th of July.
  2. The government is now prohibited from censoring social media content.
  3. Specific individuals and entities were named in the order, outlining the actions they are no longer allowed to take regarding social media censorship.
Unreported Truths 59 implied HN points 17 Nov 24
  1. A lawsuit was filed to challenge how the government, Twitter, and Pfizer worked together to ban someone from social media. One email showed direct communication between these parties about that ban.
  2. There are important legal questions about whether people whose First Amendment rights were violated can sue the government for money. Currently, federal law doesn’t clearly support this for First Amendment claims.
  3. Another key point is if unvaccinated people are considered a protected group under the law. This case argues that their rights as individuals should be protected, rather than focusing on their vaccination status.
Common Sense with Bari Weiss 1456 implied HN points 29 Feb 24
  1. Maintaining the distinction between speech and violence is crucial in civil society.
  2. Self-driving cars are safer than those driven by humans and can help reduce the high number of road deaths.
  3. Texas A&M decided to shut down its Qatar campus due to national security concerns related to the school's relationship with Qatar and its ties to groups like Hamas and Iran.
Castalia 1278 implied HN points 05 Dec 23
  1. Free speech is important because it allows everyone to express their ideas, even the ones that are controversial. When we let others speak freely, we protect our own right to speak up too.
  2. There are some concerns that free speech can support harmful ideas or groups. However, allowing open discussion can help check power and make society stronger over time.
  3. Private companies can set their own speech rules, but this can create problems and complicate open discussions. It's often better to stick with the basic idea of free speech to keep conversations simple and honest.
Glenn’s Substack 1513 implied HN points 02 Jun 23
  1. The Supreme Court's decision in New York Times v. Sullivan constitutionalized the law of libel.
  2. The case highlighted the importance of the 'actual malice' standard in libel cases, requiring proof of knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth.
  3. The Sullivan case had a significant impact by protecting the press from libel suits, but also raised concerns about media responsibility and trust over time.
The Popehat Report 4105 implied HN points 03 Apr 23
  1. Dumb defamation threat letters can lead to practical censorship of free speech.
  2. Non-public threats of litigation can intimidate individuals from exercising their rights.
  3. Efforts are needed to educate the public about free speech rights, provide accessible resources, and encourage legal support to protect speech.
The Popehat Report 3630 implied HN points 27 Apr 23
  1. American society is diverse and faces challenges in applying legal standards like the reasonable person test across different cultures.
  2. Cultural context plays a significant role in determining what constitutes a true threat in First Amendment cases.
  3. To strike a balance between free speech and protection from threats, considering the intended audience's cultural context in true threats analysis could be a valuable approach.
Adam's Legal Newsletter 698 implied HN points 09 Jan 24
  1. The Constitution does not require states to include currently ineligible candidates on the ballot, even if they may become eligible in the future.
  2. Allowing ineligible candidates on the ballot can lead to confusion for voters and cause controversy if an ineligible candidate wins the election.
  3. Interpreting the Constitution requires sticking to the text rather than overly creative lawyering to avoid confusion and promote understanding among citizens.
Common Sense with Bari Weiss 797 implied HN points 06 Mar 24
  1. Freedom of expression is fundamental for all other rights to exist.
  2. Recent hate speech laws in English-speaking countries like Canada, Britain, and Ireland are threatening free speech.
  3. It is essential to protect free speech as a core element of democracy, as seen in the ongoing censorship challenges in various countries.
The Eternally Radical Idea 412 implied HN points 11 Feb 24
  1. Greg Lukianoff testified before the House about AI threats to free speech, emphasizing the risks of AI in monitoring, flagging, and censoring individuals.
  2. FIRE introduced Campus Deplatforming Database, aiming to track incidents of censorship on college campuses.
  3. The intersection of law and AI is explored through historical reviews, highlighting the impact of technology on free speech and legal norms.
Original Jurisdiction 579 implied HN points 14 Jan 24
  1. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is facing allegations that could lead to her removal from a high-profile case involving Donald Trump.
  2. The allegations suggest an improper relationship between Willis and one of the special prosecutors appointed in the case, potentially impacting the outcome of the prosecution.
  3. Legal experts believe that while the allegations may not dismiss the charges, they could result in the disqualification of Willis and her office, leading to delays and other complications in the case.
COVID Reason 1566 implied HN points 19 Apr 23
  1. Journalist Alex Berenson is suing President Biden and others for orchestrating a public-private censorship campaign against him.
  2. Mainstream media has been silent about Berenson's case, highlighting the issue of censorship in the Covid era.
  3. The lawsuit could lead to uncovering significant information about the Covid era, challenging government censorship and the influence of powerful entities.
The Watch 860 implied HN points 21 Aug 23
  1. Some key questions for GOP candidates revolve around their stance on important issues like the COVID-19 vaccine, QAnon conspiracy theories, and racism.
  2. The GOP candidates are asked about their views on the death penalty, executing drug dealers, and their opinions on the Trump administration's policies.
  3. Questions are raised about the GOP candidates' stance on law enforcement, policing, and criminal justice reforms, including their views on the Capitol riots and the FBI.
Adam's Legal Newsletter 299 implied HN points 22 Nov 23
  1. The First Amendment is being challenged by the unique case of Trump's statements, requiring the creation of new laws governing his speech.
  2. The court faces challenges in determining the risks justifying a gag order and in assessing the evidence and mental state of Trump's statements.
  3. Trump's political speech blurs the line between protected speech and intimidating behavior, posing challenges for traditional legal analysis.
Adam's Legal Newsletter 239 implied HN points 20 Nov 23
  1. The appeal in Trump's case highlights new legal questions that need resolution due to his unconventional actions, leading to the creation of 'The Law of Trump.'
  2. Trump's statements about the prosecutors, judge, and witnesses are at the center of the appeal against a court order restricting his speech, raising First Amendment concerns.
  3. There is a split among lower courts on the constitutionality of gag orders against criminal defendants, with examples like _United States v. Ford_ and _United States v. Brown_ showcasing different perspectives.
The Chris Hedges Report 213 implied HN points 22 Feb 24
  1. The prosecution in Julian Assange's extradition case relies heavily on controversial U.S. attorney Gordon Kromberg's judicial opinions, making claims that did not convince High Court judges.
  2. Julian Assange's defense demonstrated that the allegations against him, such as endangering lives by releasing unredacted documents, were debunked, and the U.S. lacks substantial evidence.
  3. Gordon Kromberg, the prosecutor, has a history of fervently going after individuals, like Palestinian activists, using dubious methods, and his attempts to implicate individuals, like Chelsea Manning, demonstrate his aggressive tactics in legal proceedings.
The Chancery Daily 359 implied HN points 17 Apr 23
  1. The Dominion v. Fox trial in the Delaware Superior Court involves high-profile personalities and is expected to be a dramatic and historic event.
  2. The case touches on themes of norm-breaking and the challenges of handling significant legal cases in courts such as Delaware's Court of Chancery.
  3. The trial, expected to last six weeks, is anticipated to result in an appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court or potentially even the Supreme Court of the United States due to First Amendment considerations.
Karlstack 293 implied HN points 24 Jul 23
  1. The trial of Douglass Mackey highlights procedural abuses reminiscent of colonial courts
  2. Key evidence was withheld by the prosecution, impacting the defense's ability to present a full case
  3. The interpretation of the law expanded by the judge raises concerns about government power to regulate speech