Angry New Yorker |
|
|
Semi-Daily Rants from New York City's Angry Man
"As I know more of mankind I expect less of them, and am ready now to call a man a good man, upon easier terms than I was formerly."
- Dr. Samuel Johnson, Boswell, Life of Johnson, Sept. 1783
Archives
Public Interest National Interest National Review New Criterion Commentary First Things The New Atlantis Foreign Affairs Am. Enterprise Hudson Review Policy Review OpinionJournal-WSJ City Journal American Prowler NY Observer News Washington Post Wall Street Journal C.S.Monitor New York Times Washington Times Financial Times Int'l Hrld-Trb Fox News NY Sun Blogs Tacitus Instapundit The Diplomad Right Wing News Tim Blair Belmont Club Little Green Footballs Powerline Iraq Related Blogs Command Post - Iraq IRAQ NOW... Jason Van S. Sgt. Stryker Digital WarFighter Boots on Ground Healing Iraq U.S.S. Clueless Iraq The Model/a> Iraq & Iraqi's Iraq at a Glance Geopolitics/Defense DefenseLink Defend America Jane's Stratfor Global Security Strategy Page DefenseTech Ctr. for Security Policy Economics/Finance Poor and Stupid Institutional Economics The Capital Spectator The Knowledge Problem Economic Principals The Chicago School SSRN Misc. Federalist Society FindArticles Law Adams Drafting How Appealing The Volokh Conspiracy Cyberspace Lawyer Blog Oyez JOLT Digest Founders' Constitution Eric Goldman's Tech & Mktng Law Blog ScotusWiki |
Monday, April 28, 2003
More on Bruce and Free Speech A friend writes... "[T]he point is that intimidation and punishment for expressing your views does, at some point, become a first amendment issue, particularly as the FCC proposes to allow further consolidation of the mass media in the hands of private interests with political agendas. If what happens after you've spoken makes it clear that you really should have kept your mouth shut, how does that promote robust, wide open and uninhibited speech?" My response... Granted, the issue of intimidation and punishment are certainly real, and I agree that media consolidation is serious, but they are not true first amendment issues, per say. Media consolidation is rather a "policy" decision that incidentally implicates speech issues. And the Supreme Court has clearly held that while speech designed to intimidate can be regulated on 1st amendment grounds (holding this most recently in Virginia v. Black [01-1107], the cross-burning case decided earlier this month), it has also held that intimidation of you, ONCE YOU'VE HAD YOUR SAY, by others resulting incidentally from YOUR expressive/conduct or speech cannot be regulated on 1st amendment grounds (though it may, perhaps be regulated through other means, i.e. criminal law, etc.).
Comments:
Post a Comment
|
