Path: Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:45:04 +0000
From: BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Ketanji Jackson Worried That the 1st Amendment is Hamstringing Government Censorship
References: <AbGcneZpLeuJ12f4nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com> <utjpbj$2srhl$1@dont-email.me> <Crmcnc_SKN28dWD4nZ2dnZfqn_YAAAAA@giganews.com> <17bf31450798f61c$1$1100308$44d50e60@news.newsdemon.com> <Y26dnWI6_a92bGD4nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> <utmrou$3n3jl$3@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 10:52:39 -0700
Message-ID: <atropos-DA20D8.10523923032024@news.giganews.com>
Lines: 60
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-n8PH8C2I8IBTW7oFO0bX0mXLspqu3Lo59isY3ucCX4jNN1l+w01wFtpMcqSafa0a+Yvwfe+4pwWcbWV!oSGUZvjV/4f72Zg1A8jqaIEexLH1AyIEyh/IM4SUsLlkMwuuoonDTLc5+jmRuwO5u1E6ON8Wdrwu!Ey0=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 3787

In article <utmrou$3n3jl$3@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> 
wrote:

> On 3/22/24 5:02 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > On Mar 22, 2024 at 1:49:13 PM PDT, "moviePig" <never@nothere.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 3/22/2024 4:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>>   On Mar 22, 2024 at 4:17:05 AM PDT, "FPP" <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>   
> >>>>   On 3/21/24 7:17 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>>>>     In article
> >>>>>     <17bee95657459db9$30487$1351842$40d50a60@news.newsdemon.com>,
> >>>>>       moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:

> >>>>>> Seems you're now arguing for freedom of the press, as if anyone in 
> >>>>>> this dialogue has ever disputed it.
> >>>>>     
> >>>>> Effa disputed it: "Or try publishing National Defense secrets..."
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>> Not many Usenet points for that...
> >>>>>     
> >>>>> Points restored.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanny isn't a journalist.
> >>>   
> >>> Don't need to be. I'm still protected under the 1st Amendment. Nowhere 
> >>> does the 1st Amendment limit press protection to only people who work for 
> >>> big legacy corporations. Indeed, the Supreme Court has ruled that citizen
> >>> media-- bloggers, YouTubers, individual citizens commenting on websites--
> >>> all fall under the 1st Amendment's press protections.
> >>>   
> >>>> The Espionage Act
> >>>> National defense information in general is protected by the Espionage
> >>>>Act,21 18 U.S.C. §§ 793­ 798
> >>>   
> >>> New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)
> >>>   
> >>> Any elements of the Act that conflict with the Supreme Court's decision 
> >>> in NY Times v U.S. are superseded by it.
> >>>   
> >>> That's how this shit works. You know, the Supreme Court decides whether
> >>> statutes or parts of statutes are constitutional or not. This is 
> >>> something grade schoolers know but our resident amateur historian
> >>> apparently needs explained to him.
> >>
> >> So, you maintain that, if the Times were to obtain (somehow) and publish
> >> a top-secret map of all U.S. nuclear silos -- say, in the name of
> >> "neighborhood awareness" -- there'd be no reprisal?
> > 
> > There'd be plenty of reprisal in court of public opinion, but any official
> > government sanction would be illegal.

> Bullshit.

New York Times v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)

(Note: I'm the one who consistently produces cites in this thread to 
back up what I say. Effa is the one who lies and says I don't have cites 
and then makes ridiculous claims with no cites to back up what *he* 
says.)