undefined | Better HN

0 pointssneak2y ago0 comments

That's the thing, though - they are still "protected speech" under 1A. That's why laws banning it get struck down.

0 comments

If you're going to lawyer every word here, I'll be more precise. I mean immune from legal redress, not "protected" per 1a. Dealing with defamation via civil suit is perfectly consistent with a free speech absolutist position, which is my original point.

This is an incredibly tedious exchange, it seems like you're going to pains to find the least charitable interpretation of what I'm saying.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointssneak2y ago0 comments

That's the thing, though - they are still "protected speech" under 1A. That's why laws banning it get struck down.

0 comments

ch4s32y ago

This is an incredibly tedious exchange, it seems like you're going to pains to find the least charitable interpretation of what I'm saying.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse