The companies are publicly owned, but unless the gov't has major stock holding, they're still in the private sector. Also, corporations are people now, so they should get the same protections, right? /s
Reporter on MSNBC just asked Barbara McQuade why Silicon Valley should be able to block opposing views. Stop it. Are you stupid? Do you think MSNBC doesn't have a right to not share shit they find offensive? By asking that question you leave it open to doubt. As if Texas ever had a right to tell a private company what they can or cannot publish. I get so tired of the bullshit. Keith Olbermann would never have asked that question. Rachel Maddow would never asked that question. JFC.
And that's what the 6-3 slant allows him to do. He can "dissent" without changing the desired outcome. Much like how the "Moderate GOP Trio" (R-Money, Concerned Collins, Murky Write-in) operate in the Senate.
I think the blowback when the Court actually releases the opinion will only build on the blowback born from the draft opinion that was leaked. Anyone who actually cares about the decision will have it well in the front of their mind in the voting booth.
Your point about the leak vs. the leaked material is spot on and yet another indictment of how many content creators have no idea how to structure a sentence.
If they're the majority they say they are, that "everyone is against you libtard satanists", they should leave ALL of them and put FB, IG, Twitter, TikTok, etc out of business in seconds.
I like the "You ain't my mom" reasoning myself.
Of course he said his site has 240 million users…
The companies are publicly owned, but unless the gov't has major stock holding, they're still in the private sector. Also, corporations are people now, so they should get the same protections, right? /s
As long as it isn’t that fancy mustard…you know the kind that tan suit wearing guy liked.
Reporter on MSNBC just asked Barbara McQuade why Silicon Valley should be able to block opposing views. Stop it. Are you stupid? Do you think MSNBC doesn't have a right to not share shit they find offensive? By asking that question you leave it open to doubt. As if Texas ever had a right to tell a private company what they can or cannot publish. I get so tired of the bullshit. Keith Olbermann would never have asked that question. Rachel Maddow would never asked that question. JFC.
Damn. When does Judge Jackson become Justice Jackson? All this waiting around is making me nervous.
Amy Coathanger and Kegs opposed the law in order to protect cults from being censored, that’s all.
And that's what the 6-3 slant allows him to do. He can "dissent" without changing the desired outcome. Much like how the "Moderate GOP Trio" (R-Money, Concerned Collins, Murky Write-in) operate in the Senate.
Jesus, you couldn't have stopped after 'whining' and left the rest unsaid? THAT IS NOT A MENTAL IMAGE I NEEDED, SOJOURNER!
I think the blowback when the Court actually releases the opinion will only build on the blowback born from the draft opinion that was leaked. Anyone who actually cares about the decision will have it well in the front of their mind in the voting booth.
Your point about the leak vs. the leaked material is spot on and yet another indictment of how many content creators have no idea how to structure a sentence.
Eh, so you hire a spambot company to sign up 50M sock puppet accounts and then get all gay-pr0ny on them. Problem solved.
If they're the majority they say they are, that "everyone is against you libtard satanists", they should leave ALL of them and put FB, IG, Twitter, TikTok, etc out of business in seconds.
I think I heard that Alito's retiring end of session and she'll be sworn in then. So, next month maybe?
You mean Breyer? It would be great if Alito would retire, but I doubt that will happen anytime soon.
Oh my stars! Judges just deciding cases on whatever ludicrous crap infects their fevered brains! UNPOSSIBLE!!11!one
Are The New York Times, the Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal "common carriers?" How about Faux "News?"