MS NOW Anchor Feels ‘Deep Unease’ Over Celebrating America’s 250th Birthday
Nation Columnist Says the ‘Messier’ Platner Turns Out to Be, the More He...
Cato Stooge: ‘So You Can’t Sit on a Sidewalk Anymore?’ Not After Curfew...
Bernie Sanders’ Bill Would Have Government Take Half of AI Companies’ Stock
‘Murder,’ He Smote!: Raging Scott Pelley Goes Off on Bari Weiss and New...
Twin Cities Anti-ICE Protesters Awarded the JFK Profile in Courage Award
Free Press: Graham Platner’s ‘Troubles’ Strike Many as Relatable, Like Their Drunk Right-W...
New Jersey State Troopers Step Up, Rush Anti-ICE Rioters at 9 PM Curfew;...
Federal Appeals Court Finds Trump’s Transgender Military Ban Unconstitutional, Based Upon...
Bulwark Founder FANGIRLS Over 'Brand New to Politics' Graham Platner Who She Claims...
Jon Ossoff Just Admitted How OBSESSED He Is With Trump (and That He...
Turns Out Robo-Talarico's 'Bot Problem Goes WAY Deeper Than Just 2 Clips' (Is...
BRUTAL Post Sums Up Graham Platner Campaign's Three-Act Farce: Threaten, Lie, Then Lie...
Standing by Maine KAMPF! Jessica Tarlov's BUT TRUMP Defense of Graham Platner Goes...
REVOLTING: Megyn Kelly Didn't Just Let Her Mask Slip on Israel; She Pulled...

Twitter Files Extra: The Australian government’s censorship requests

Matt Taibbi introduced this latest turn in the Twitter files:

Advertisement

So… here… we… go!

Social cohesion? The (American) Supreme Court once had something to say about the First Amendment and social cohesion:

Accordingly a function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea. That is why freedom of speech, though not absolute, … is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment, unless shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest. … There is no room under our Constitution for a more restrictive view. For the alternative would lead to standardization of ideas either by legislatures, courts, or dominant political or community groups.

Advertisement

Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949) (Citations removed.) Naturally, there is nothing wrong with the government promoting social cohesion by means unrelated to the suppression of speech, but to do it by censorship is wrong.

But of course creating a standardization of ideas is the entire point of these censors down under:

And their censorship was not limited to their borders:

Advertisement

That link in turn links to the article in the Australian mentioned by Mr. Taibbi at the beginning, but its behind a paywall and we are cheap.

Some interesting reactions:

Australia more than most.

Advertisement

That seems like a useful resource.

***

Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy’s conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement