Taking note of what drink Mia was seen tasting, several social media users went on to insist that the beverage was made in 1943 in the Nazi-occupied part of France.
Jerry LambeApr 8th, 2021, 2:01 pm
Sponsor of HB1219 Rep. Susan Lynn.
State lawmakers in Tennessee are moving forward with a bill aimed at “stopping the press from serving as a slander machine” by mandating that media outlets which publish reports on criminal charges or civil lawsuits filed against individuals or organizations also publish a follow up report on the outcome of those cases. Legal experts resoundingly derided the measure as “laughably unconstitutional.”
The HB1219, also known as the “Stop Guilt by Association Act,” was placed on the House Civil Justice subcommittee calendar Wednesday and scheduled for debate next week.
Under the measure, if a media outlet reported on the initial facts of a particular controversy, that outlet would also be required to provide comparably equal coverage in “time, place, magnitude, prominence, scale, and manner” regarding the ultimate conclusion of that controversy. It would also entitle people accused of criminal conduc
Fri, Feb 19th 2021 10:52am
Mike Masnick
Earlier this month, we wrote about how various Republicans in state legislatures were introducing blatantly unconstitutional bills that tried to do away with Section 230 and which all attempted to block the ability of websites to do any content moderation. Many of the bills were nearly identical (and may have come from Chris Sevier, the profoundly troubled individual, who
somehow keeps convincing state legislators to introduce blatantly unconstitutional bills that attack speech online). One of the bills we mentioned was from North Dakota. Lawyer Akiva Cohen points out that the North Dakota bill has been updated. and (incredibly) made
Jerry LambeFeb 18th, 2021, 11:52 am
Republicans in North Dakota’s state legislature are targeting the civil liability protections afforded to social media companies like Twitter and Facebook with a new bill that would make it illegal to “censor” users. Unfortunately for those hoping the measure would be a crippling legal salvo in the war on “cancel culture,” attorneys who have reviewed the measure say it’s an unconstitutional and self-contradictory mess that’s impossible to enforce.
The bill, titled “an Act to permit civil actions against social media sites for censoring speech,” is the state’s attempt to circumvent the Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, the widely misunderstood law that protects internet companies from being held liable for content created by third-parties that is hosted on their websites. The federal law has drawn the ire of some Republicans who characterize it as a tool which allows internet companies and websites to ce