Quote:
Originally Posted by pepper24
Don't worry, this power will only ever be used against bad people.
|
Sure, except that the basic definition of the restriction to 1st amendment protections can be found with a 2 second search and the most basic resources ever: Encyclopedia Britannica.
Quote:
|
Second, a few narrow categories of speech are not protected from government restrictions. The main such categories are incitement, defamation, fraud, obscenity, child pornography, fighting words, and threats. As the Supreme Court held in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the government may forbid “incitement”—speech “directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action” and “likely to incite or produce such action” (such as a speech to a mob urging it to attack a nearby building). But speech urging action at some unspecified future time may not be forbidden.
|
It's clear to me that the bolded applies and Twitter is 100% acting constitutionally as the law and amendment has been interpreted.
Free speech is not universal and never has been, and only a mouth breather without a decent education would think that it is.
Seriously...can we get mandatory civics lessons in public schools again?