with no significant exceptions, prominent writers the Founders often cited, including William Blackstone, Jean-Louis De Lolme, and George Tucker, connected press freedom with the right of every "freeman," "citizen," or "individual" to "write," "print," or "publish" his or her thoughts.
This fact implies the Founders didn't intend the press clause to protect the existing or future collection of "newsmongers" per se but rather to recognize the right of any person (or "freeman") to use printing presses (Until 1694, England imposed licenses on publications, which the Founders abhorred).
James Madison's following first draft of the Bill of Rights' speech/press clauses highlights this point: "The people [emphasis added] shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable."
According to Johnson's dictionary, "people" had such definitions as "a nation," "men, or per[s]ons in general," and "the commonality."
Because they had tyrants trying to stop them from communicating or spreading the word through the use of “licenses” required to operate a printing press.
The king could take back the license if he didn’t like what the press was saying.
[Constitutional law should accept any]...communication technology that today serves the role the printing press did in the 1700s...The printing press itself was understood during the Framing era as a technological innovation, and rights were understood as being adaptable to technological innovations.
with no significant exceptions, prominent writers the Founders often cited, including William Blackstone, Jean-Louis De Lolme, and George Tucker, connected press freedom with the right of every "freeman," "citizen," or "individual" to "write," "print," or "publish" his or her thoughts.
This fact implies the Founders didn't intend the press clause to protect the existing or future collection of "newsmongers" per se but rather to recognize the right of any person (or "freeman") to use printing presses (Until 1694, England imposed licenses on publications, which the Founders abhorred).
James Madison's following first draft of the Bill of Rights' speech/press clauses highlights this point: "The people [emphasis added] shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable."
According to Johnson's dictionary, "people" had such definitions as "a nation," "men, or per[s]ons in general," and "the commonality."
Because the Founders thought "birds in bird cages need newspapers for them to shit on" ?
Because they had tyrants trying to stop them from communicating or spreading the word through the use of “licenses” required to operate a printing press.
The king could take back the license if he didn’t like what the press was saying.
This leads me to believe that social media is now the press, and they CANNOT abridge our right to speak and spread information to each other.
We have the supreme court, the time to push is now. Especially now as they are trying to steal the senate to pack the courts.
[Constitutional law should accept any]...communication technology that today serves the role the printing press did in the 1700s...The printing press itself was understood during the Framing era as a technological innovation, and rights were understood as being adaptable to technological innovations.