431
Comments (9)
sorted by:
6
RandomPanda 6 points ago +6 / -0

Language too ambiguous and essentially duplicate the shit show of section 230. This is a token effort or ND Republicans are some stupid bastards.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
3
Nunyo 3 points ago +3 / -0

"Obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent or harassing, or otherwise objectionable." No, this isnt subjective or anything.

2
Susurro 2 points ago +2 / -0

Oklahoma did this the other day. I like this trend. Now give it teeth! https://rumble.com/vcste7-social-media-censorship-bill-proposed.html

1
RussianBlyat 1 point ago +1 / -0

If they can get the law to work, wouldn't that allow citizens of other states to sue these companies in North Dakota?

NAL, but from what I understand this would be possible under the long arm statues since the companies operate their business inside the state.

1
Spectre001 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's useless. They'll just say "IT'S RAYCIS, HATEFUL, AND OBJECTIONABLE!! ORANGE MAN BAD!!!" when they report it

1
Latinalover 1 point ago +1 / -0

Anybody from Greg Abbotts office in TX listening?

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
tootthebighorn 1 point ago +1 / -0

So far Sec. 230 hasn't overruled anything.