If a governmental agency, or a quasi-governmental agency, arranges for communications service via Twitter, cell-phone, or other device, to be blocked or deactivated, is that an abridgement of the First Amendment?
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.
I hear, all the time, of artists and the like who say that if their work isn't published/put into a specific museum, their rights under this amendment are being abridged, and I think no they're not -- you have other venues for publishing, other venues for public display. But when the actual tool for communication is yanked away, I think that it is. Hard liners could say well, you can still TALK to people, we're not stopping that. But I think that would be a coy way around the question.
If you can't communicate to a group of others, when you normally can, then your rights are being abridged.
No comments:
Post a Comment