It will be very telling for the future of First Amendment jurisprudence if SCOTUS accepts the DC Circuit’s handwave “oh national security satisfies strict scrutiny.” If it does, that’s likely the end of the era of aggressive First Amendment protection by SCOTUS.
Reposted from
Steve Vladeck
#BREAKING: Supreme Court agrees to resolve TikTok case; will hold (very) expedited argument on January 10.
The Court did *not* grant emergency relief, but deferred the requests for an injunction pending oral argument. So as of now, the law will still start producing effects on January 19:
The Court did *not* grant emergency relief, but deferred the requests for an injunction pending oral argument. So as of now, the law will still start producing effects on January 19:
Comments
And if it's been worth it, from a corporate profit standpoint?
[Mini QP] Is 1st Amend squarely at issue here?
[Possible Answer] No. The state isn't regulating speech. Merely ownership of a business entity. The infringement of citizen speech is downstream of private party response to that regulation.
Also, this is inapplicable where the State's purpose is to infringe speech (e.g. Texas social media regs)
Assuming humanity surives the next four years.
Now that’s a scary thought.
Sec 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment appears to be of no importance at all these days.
THEIR side will end up with 1st amendment rights specifically for guns (THE guns, not people using guns).
Has the Iraq War "there's evidence, just trust us" been completely forgotten already.
** or any member of the new administration even tangentially related to natsec. Including of course Trump.
(* Hides *)
Almost seems . . . un-American.
-Roberts Court