Posted on Aug 12, 2024
Actually, Tim Walz, the First Amendment Does Protect Misinformation and ‘Hate Speech’ | National...
262
62
8
17
17
0
While such a sentiment has become disturbingly popular with some Americans and policy-makers like Governor Walz, it is incorrect. The First Amendment does guarantee free speech when it comes to both misinformation and hate speech. Individuals and public officials may detest and condemn such speech, and platforms may choose not to carry it, but to insert the government into regulation of such expression would both set a troubling precedent and undermine our current First Amendment principles in ways that should concern Americans across the political spectrum. While policy-makers and individuals may think they are protecting the public from potential harm or propaganda, laws that would allow the government to regulate misinformation would quickly risk trampling on the ability to discuss a wide array of political and social issues. The consensus about what is true regarding sensitive topics such as abortion, the Middle East, and the Covid-19 pandemic can change rapidly. Kamala’s “folksy” VP pick Tim Walz says you have no right to free speech if you say things the government deems “misinformation.”?
Actually, Tim Walz, the First Amendment Does Protect Misinformation and ‘Hate Speech’ | National...
Posted from nationalreview.comPosted in these groups: 
Political Opinions
Political Opinions
Edited 4 mo ago
Posted 4 mo ago
Responses: 5
14
14
0
Liberals work to ban free speech, neuter the Supreme Court and achieve one party rule. There was no problem with the Supreme Court when it tilted liberal. The Wuhan covid lab created virus ushered in the idea of “ disinformation boards” and the suppression speech on social media. Of course this all goes just one way . “Biden is sharp as a tack” , “Harris was never border Czar”, “ Harris has never claimed her Indian roots” are all OK.
(14)
(0)
Amn Roger Omberg
There is also, "the opinion rule", well That is what I thot at the time rule. based on the idea that information can change with wind, its hard to slam someone in a court case over that! The MEDIA, DEMONcrats use that all the time.
(4)
(0)
14
14
0
There is very little that the Government can do about most things you can legally say. It would have to prove that your words were meant to erroneously induce panic or cause actual harm to another person I believe.
Slander on the other hand is a civil matter that can be dealt with in court, but again the burden of proof for actual harm rests with the person brining the suit.
Slander on the other hand is a civil matter that can be dealt with in court, but again the burden of proof for actual harm rests with the person brining the suit.
(14)
(0)
5
5
0
Walz is a true liberal, only speech that is against the democratic agenda is to be regulated and considered misinformation and hate speech. He is a socialist/communist and will stop at nothing to finish destroying the country.
(5)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google