Hunter Biden Apologizes
Trump continues to bully and sue to suppress the press and free speech. He knows that just to defend a lawsuit is incredibly expensive, and hopes that people just give in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fs9v0sdZixs
Tag: freedom of speech
Mahmoud Khalil Tells His Story | The Ezra Klein Show
President Trump literally arrested a legal resident based on his speech. This is a huge, massive infringement of basic democratic rights by a president who ran on free speech.
Because the man was educated, in custody, people getting deported would talk to him and ask him questions. A man who had been in the country for over 20 years and had four children under 11, was showing up to his immigration hearing when he was grabbed to be deported. Another person asked him what a paper he signed was. The paper said he was to be deported. Another 19-year old asked if it would be safe for his mom to visit him, the answer was no. The immigration detention center had a lot of crying people in it. These people were depicted as criminals by the administration when they were picked up at their immigration hearings and their jobs.
Khalil missed the birth of his child because Trump decided to arrest him based on speech. The justification required the Secretary of State to go along with it. Marco Rubio did, losing what little dignity he had left. Khalil requested to be temporarily let out for the birth of his child. HIs request was denied.
I disagree with a lot of what he says about Palestine and Israel, but his detention was an insult to the principles that democracy stands on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2BLU3Gy3YE
The FCC’s Paramount/Skydance Decision Aims To Reshape Broadcast Journalism by Bureaucratic Fiat
“Carr, in other words, thinks it is entirely appropriate for federal regulators to demand “significant changes” in the way news organizations operate, including what they cover, how they cover it, the sources they interview, the people they invite to comment on current events, and the way they respond to complaints of bias. He is explicitly setting the FCC up as an arbiter of good journalism.
That power grab is consistent with Carr’s understanding of the government’s role in the marketplace of ideas, which he thinks should include restricting the editorial discretion of social media platforms in the name of “reining in Big Tech” and preventing “discrimination against core political viewpoints.” Carr, an avowed free speech champion, presents his concerns about broadcast news bias in similar terms, saying “a handful of national programmers” should not “control and dictate to the American what the narrative is, what they can say, what they can think.” As with his vendetta against “Big Tech,” he perversely portrays government interference with private editorial decisions as a victory for freedom of speech.
Contrary to that puzzling take, FCC oversight of broadcast journalism does not protect First Amendment rights; it undermines them. Such meddling would be obviously unconstitutional in the context of print, cable, satellite, streaming, or online journalism. For reasons that make less and less sense every day, broadcasting is treated differently, supposedly because government licensing and regulation are necessary to address “the scarcity of radio frequencies.””
https://reason.com/2025/07/25/the-fccs-paramount-skydance-decision-aims-to-reshape-broadcast-journalism-by-bureaucratic-fiat/
Jon Stewart Reacts to Colbert’s Cancellation & Trump’s “Bawdy” Epstein Doodles | The Daily Show
Jon Stewart Reacts to Colbert’s Cancellation & Trump’s “Bawdy” Epstein Doodles | The Daily Show
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwOLo_U6bTw
The First Amendment Protects CNN’s Reporting on ICEBlock and Iran
“CNN published a story on Monday covering software developer Joshua Aaron’s ICEBlock app, which lets “users alert people nearby to sightings of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in their area.” CNN reports that the app, released in April, has amassed over 20,000 users. The app, which is only available on the App Store (Aaron is concerned about the mandatory data collection on Android devices), allows users to specify where they’ve spotted Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity and alerts other users within a 5-mile radius via push notification. The function of the app is not dissimilar from Waze and Google Maps, which help drivers avoid encounters with police officers monitoring highways and roads for traffic violations.
The First Amendment protects ICEBlock, just as it does Waze and Google Maps. Even if it didn’t, it still would protect CNN’s coverage of it. Aaron Terr, director of public advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), tells Reason that prosecuting CNN for reporting on ICEBlock “would be like prosecuting a news outlet for reporting on Virginia drivers illegally using radar detectors to avoid speeding tickets.” Moreover, the First Amendment protects the development and use of the ICEBlock app itself because “putting out general information that someone, somewhere might use to evade law enforcement” is not aiding and abetting but “just providing others true information,” says Terr.”
https://reason.com/2025/07/02/the-first-amendment-protects-cnns-reporting-on-iceblock-and-iran/
The Trump Administration Says Its Speech-Based Deportation Policy ‘Does Not Exist’
“Trump administration argues that its policy of arresting, detaining, and deporting international students for expressing anti-Israel opinions “does not exist.” The government’s lawyers also maintain that the supposedly nonexistent policy is perfectly consistent with the First Amendment—a less laughable argument that nevertheless is hard to reconcile with Supreme Court precedent, especially as applied by several lower courts.
President Donald Trump and his underlings, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Department of Homeland Security officials, have made it clear that they are determined to expel students, including legal permanent residents as well as visa holders, who have engaged in protests or other forms of advocacy that the government views as “pro-Hamas” or “anti-Semitic.” Rubio says those activities, even when “otherwise lawful,” justify removal from the United States because they threaten to undermine U.S. foreign policy interests.
The Trump administration claims it is targeting “aid or support” for “designated terrorist groups” and “unlawful anti-Semitic harassment and violence,” neither of which is constitutionally protected. That defense is hard to take seriously, since the government avers that even writing an anti-Israel op-ed piece or peacefully participating in pro-Palestinian protests falls into those categories.”
https://reason.com/2025/07/09/the-trump-administration-says-its-speech-based-deportation-policy-does-not-exist/
The Rationale for Deporting Mahmoud Khalil Is Alarmingly Vague and Broad
“Mahmoud Khalil, the first target of President Donald Trump’s crusade against international students he describes as “terrorist sympathizers,” was released from custody on Friday after more than three months of detention. But the Trump administration is still trying to deport Khalil, a legal permanent resident, based on his participation in anti-Israel protests at Columbia University.
The official rationale for expelling Khalil is that he poses a threat to U.S. foreign policy interests. That justification is alarmingly broad and vague, raising due process and free speech concerns that interact with each other.”
https://reason.com/2025/06/25/the-rationale-for-deporting-mahmoud-khalil-is-alarmingly-vague-and-broad/
Jon Stewart – One of My Favorite People – What Now? with Trevor Noah Podcast
‘Social media like Twitter/X isn’t free speech. It’s ultra-processed speech. It’s speech like how Doritos is food. It is toxic and designed as such.’
‘Conspiracy believers are not just asking questions. They question the narrative but not the counter narrative. Their questioning isn’t the problem, but their certainty.’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44uC12g9ZVk
Terry Moran Insulted Stephen Miller? That’s None of the Government’s Business.
“This is a textbook example of “jawboning”—when the government tries to accomplish some censorship by threatening improper government action. It is exactly the sort of thing that conservatives rightly hated about the previous administration: President Joe Biden, his senior advisers, and various federal employees browbeat social media companies into taking down content that the feds deemed wrong, hateful, or dangerous. They didn’t just say that they disagreed with major platform moderation policies: They raised the possibility of punitive legislation against Facebook, Google, and Twitter unless they complied.
Leavitt is free to complain about Moran’s comment, as Vance did. But her insinuation that she would be speaking with Moran’s manager reads like a threat, and thus like an attempt at censorship. As Jenin Younes, a civil liberties attorney, noted in a reply to Leavitt, the Trump administration issued an executive order to prevent the kind of jawboning that took place under the previous White House. To turn around and do the same thing is obviously hypocritical.
“Journalists and everyone else can say what they want about members of the Administration (and anything else) without having to fear reprisal from the government,” wrote Younes. “You should delete this tweet and apologize for your attempted act of tyranny and also failure to understand basic constitutional concepts.”
As for Moran’s post: It probably was unwise for a straight news reporter to share his spicy speculations about Miller’s motivations. Mainstream media organizations have different rules for news reporters and opinion commentators, and it’s possible that Moran violated his company’s social media policy. He has a First Amendment right vis a vis the U.S. government, not with respect to ABC.”
https://reason.com/2025/06/08/terry-moran-insulted-stephen-miller-thats-none-of-the-governments-business/
A Federal Judge Lists 8 Ways That Trump Violated the Constitution by Punishing a Disfavored Law Firm
“After President Donald Trump began penalizing major law firms that had offended him in one way or another last February, nine of them chose to surrender rather than fight. They agreed to humiliating concessions that included pro bono work, totaling nearly $1 billion, for causes favored by the president. But several firms stood their ground, arguing that Trump’s executive orders targeting them violated the First Amendment and undermined the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.”
https://reason.com/2025/05/28/a-federal-judge-lists-8-ways-that-trump-violated-the-constitution-by-punishing-a-disfavored-law-firm/