Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That sounds like the opposite of free speech absolutism. This is the government silencing speech!


>This is the government silencing speech!

Which they can do, once you get over a very high bar indeed.

We have literally seen the Supreme Court protect speech advocating for violence against the Government.

>Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action".

Specifically, the Court struck down Ohio's criminal syndicalism statute, because that statute broadly prohibited the mere advocacy of violence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

I much prefer the rule of law to the rule of Twitter mob.


But what about free speech absolutism! “Yeah of course the government can silence people” doesn’t sound like absolutism to me.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: