And other than Breyer, he is probably next out. He's been on the court for 30 years, he might either just want to leave or Obama might take him on a 'hunting trip'
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a case over former President Donald Trump's efforts to block critics from his personal Twitter account.
The court said there was nothing left to the case after Trump was permanently suspended from Twitter and ended his presidential term in January.
...
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a separate opinion arguing that the bigger issue raised by the case, and especially Twitter's decision to boot Trump, is “the dominant digital platforms themselves. As Twitter made clear, the right to cut off speech lies most powerfully in the hands of private digital platforms.”
Thomas agreed with his colleagues about the outcome of the case, but said the situation raises “interesting and important questions.”
The case concerned the @realdonaldtrump account with more than 88 million followers and Trump's argument that it is his personal property. The Justice Department argued that blocking people from it was akin to elected officials who refuse to allow their opponents’ yard signs on their front lawns.
So, if tech oligarchs COLLUDE to suppress people's free speech and COLLUDE to stifle competition, where they could have free speech, wouldn't that be COLLUSION?
Judge Thomas is brilliant and so is his opinion on this. I sure hope someone files a petition that fits the roadmap he provided, because it sounds like he definitely wants to travel that road!
For example, although a “private entity is not ordinarily constrained by the First Amendment,” Halleck, 587 U.S., at ___, ___ (slip op., at 6, 9), it is if the government coerces or induces it to take action the government itself would not be permitted to do, such as censor expression of a lawful viewpoint.
This opinion has implications for vaxports as well, undercutting the "it's the free market and private businesses can do whatever they want" claims.
The government cannot accomplish through threats of adverse government action what the Constitution prohibits it from doing directly.
So, if the government can't force you to wear a mask, they cant use the health department to shut down businesses who refuse to make their customers wear masks.
What we need are brave patriots who have the courage (and legal support) to fight for their rights instead of rolling over and accepting every restriction that despotic politicians decide to impose on us.
Means Ted Cruz and the republican should push to revoke 230 asap. These congress hearing with big tech are bull shit and they lie under oath and it is know because they will never be in trouble for it. Whatever ask a question they always say I'll get that back to you but we never actually see them get that back to them. At this point they should just establish the big tech is big tech and shouldn't have protections they're too big and should be able to monitor themselves.
Ted Cruz and the R's in Congress can't even get the Coke machine removed from the Capitol building, at the moment. They have zero power to do anything.
In Simple Terms: You can not violate inalienable rights regardless of any Laws, Rulings, Edicts, Regulations, or any KNOWN Legal Instruments IN AMERICA.
Inalienable Rights via the Constitution and Bill of Rights Comes from GOD as defined by the federalist papers which were the basis of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. One Nation, UNDER GOD WITH LIBERTIES AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
Thomas just ripped the armor off of MSM and SM by their actions of censorship on open platforms where they can now be sued and due to the OPINION of a SUPREME COURT JUSTICE calls into question whether there was or is a violation of said such INALIENABLE RIGHTS.
pretty much means nothing
unless he can get 4 other justices to agree with him
Anyone who disagrees is a racist.
I'm tired of pretending that we need specific people to follow the laws for the laws to exist.
It means we have one Supreme Court Justice who knows what's up.
And other than Breyer, he is probably next out. He's been on the court for 30 years, he might either just want to leave or Obama might take him on a 'hunting trip'
Googled that for ya:
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a case over former President Donald Trump's efforts to block critics from his personal Twitter account.
The court said there was nothing left to the case after Trump was permanently suspended from Twitter and ended his presidential term in January.
...
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a separate opinion arguing that the bigger issue raised by the case, and especially Twitter's decision to boot Trump, is “the dominant digital platforms themselves. As Twitter made clear, the right to cut off speech lies most powerfully in the hands of private digital platforms.”
Thomas agreed with his colleagues about the outcome of the case, but said the situation raises “interesting and important questions.”
The case concerned the @realdonaldtrump account with more than 88 million followers and Trump's argument that it is his personal property. The Justice Department argued that blocking people from it was akin to elected officials who refuse to allow their opponents’ yard signs on their front lawns.
So, if tech oligarchs COLLUDE to suppress people's free speech and COLLUDE to stifle competition, where they could have free speech, wouldn't that be COLLUSION?
Justice Thomas is so right .. man is BRILLIANT.. if anyone can get this done it is him
Judge Thomas is brilliant and so is his opinion on this. I sure hope someone files a petition that fits the roadmap he provided, because it sounds like he definitely wants to travel that road!
This opinion has implications for vaxports as well, undercutting the "it's the free market and private businesses can do whatever they want" claims.
So, if the government can't force you to wear a mask, they cant use the health department to shut down businesses who refuse to make their customers wear masks.
What we need are brave patriots who have the courage (and legal support) to fight for their rights instead of rolling over and accepting every restriction that despotic politicians decide to impose on us.
Justice Thomas is leading the way to end tech tyranny. Believe it or not, there are many federal judges around the country who agree with him.
Means Ted Cruz and the republican should push to revoke 230 asap. These congress hearing with big tech are bull shit and they lie under oath and it is know because they will never be in trouble for it. Whatever ask a question they always say I'll get that back to you but we never actually see them get that back to them. At this point they should just establish the big tech is big tech and shouldn't have protections they're too big and should be able to monitor themselves.
Ted Cruz and the R's in Congress can't even get the Coke machine removed from the Capitol building, at the moment. They have zero power to do anything.
It means Thomas set the precedent to get rid of 230 just in time for Trump to make his own social media platform.
Hahahaha
In Simple Terms: You can not violate inalienable rights regardless of any Laws, Rulings, Edicts, Regulations, or any KNOWN Legal Instruments IN AMERICA.
Inalienable Rights via the Constitution and Bill of Rights Comes from GOD as defined by the federalist papers which were the basis of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. One Nation, UNDER GOD WITH LIBERTIES AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
Thomas just ripped the armor off of MSM and SM by their actions of censorship on open platforms where they can now be sued and due to the OPINION of a SUPREME COURT JUSTICE calls into question whether there was or is a violation of said such INALIENABLE RIGHTS.
THE DUDE IS BRILLANT.
I like simple terms, thanks fo the explanation