Re: Ketanji Jackson Worried That the 1st Amendment is Hamstringing Government Censorship

In article <utmrou$3n3jl$3@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
wrote:

On 3/22/24 5:02 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

On Mar 22, 2024 at 1:49:13 PM PDT, "moviePig" <never@nothere.com> wrote:
 

On 3/22/2024 4:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

  On Mar 22, 2024 at 4:17:05 AM PDT, "FPP" <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
 

  On 3/21/24 7:17 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

    In article
    <17bee95657459db9$30487$1351842$40d50a60@news.newsdemon.com>,
      moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:

Seems you're now arguing for freedom of the press, as if anyone in
this dialogue has ever disputed it.

   
Effa disputed it: "Or try publishing National Defense secrets..."
   

Not many Usenet points for that...

   
Points restored.

>
Thanny isn't a journalist.

 
Don't need to be. I'm still protected under the 1st Amendment. Nowhere
does the 1st Amendment limit press protection to only people who work for
big legacy corporations. Indeed, the Supreme Court has ruled that citizen
media-- bloggers, YouTubers, individual citizens commenting on websites--
all fall under the 1st Amendment's press protections.
 

The Espionage Act
National defense information in general is protected by the Espionage
Act,21 18 U.S.C. �� 793� 798

 
New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)
 
Any elements of the Act that conflict with the Supreme Court's decision
in NY Times v U.S. are superseded by it.
 
That's how this shit works. You know, the Supreme Court decides whether
statutes or parts of statutes are constitutional or not. This is
something grade schoolers know but our resident amateur historian
apparently needs explained to him.

>
So, you maintain that, if the Times were to obtain (somehow) and publish
a top-secret map of all U.S. nuclear silos -- say, in the name of
"neighborhood awareness" -- there'd be no reprisal?

 
There'd be plenty of reprisal in court of public opinion, but any official
government sanction would be illegal.

Bullshit.

New York Times v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)

(Note: I'm the one who consistently produces cites in this thread to
back up what I say. Effa is the one who lies and says I don't have cites
and then makes ridiculous claims with no cites to back up what *he*
says.)