First Amendment News

A New York federal district court found that a man was not protected by the First Amendment in fooling people into voting by text or by social media posts. The judge concluded that in the case of elections, more speech could not counter the ill effects of the false information, “This compelling interest undoubtedly includes making sure voters have accurate information about how, when, and where to vote. Prosecutions such as the one before this

The Supreme Court announced it would entertain arguments February 21 and 22 about content moderation on social media. It will later consider First Amendment issues raised by Texas and Florida laws that restrict social media companies. The February arguments will address whether Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act enacted to spare platforms from liability for third-party content is still a viable protection given the way they have used Section 230 to protect themselves in

Louis Menand in The New Yorker, January 30, 2023, describes the decades long decline of the the public’s faith in the press. Former president Donald Trump had much to do with the decline by treating the press as an “enemy of the American people.” Holding to the “objectivity” standard had not served the press or the public as retired media columnist Margaret Sullivan has argued. Menand concludes that the power of the press is “like

Leonard Downie Jr., The Washington Post, January 30, 2023, reports that editors and journalists are finding “objectivity” ill-suited for the challenges of modern reporting. “They believe,” writes Downie, “that pursuing objectivity can lead to false balance or misleading ‘bothsidesism’ in covering stories about race, the treatment of women, LGBTQ+ rights, income inequality, climate change and many other subjects. And, in today’s diversifying newsrooms, they feel it negates many of their own identities, life experiences and

A federal judge shut down a California law holding doctors responsible for disseminating false information about Covid-19. The judge, William B. Shubb, said the law was “unconstitutionally vague” and that in a new area of study, it is hard to determine the falsity of a scientific conclusion. Governor Gavin Newsom said the law was tailored to address egregious instances of a doctor acting with malicious intent or straying from established standards of care in treating