undefined | Better HN

0 pointsrmbyrro3y ago0 comments

I'm also not very familiar, but I understood it differently:

The government did not let it for private sector to regulate when it explicitly guaranteed the right in the constitution...

0 comments

maxbond3y ago

The text better supports GP's understanding:

> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This is explicitly about what sorts of laws Congress may not pass, and not about the conduct of private citizens or institutions.

krapp3y ago

Further, the Tenth Amendment:

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Because the Constitution doesn't delegate the power to regulate speech to the US, but rather prohibits it, by definition the power to regulate speech is reserved by the States and the people.

ellen3643y ago

That’s interesting. Would the Tenth Amendment prevent the federal government regulating free speech in the opposite direction, e.g. a law saying “companies can’t do anything to limit free speech”?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse