Monday, November 19, 2018
#FREESPEECH IN THE NEWS: NOVEMBER 19, 2018
As the Citadel of Free Speech here in Cleveland, we work to protect and promote the basis of our democracy by sharing related stories, commentary, and opinions on free speech in the 21st century. Here's what's making the news – and what you should know about – in the past week.
1.) Neo-Nazi Harassment Is Not Free Speech, Judge Rules
A federal judge’s decision to allow a lawsuit to proceed against the publisher of a neo-Nazi website is “dangerous for free speech,” the publisher’s attorney said.
Attorney Marc Randazza said he believes U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen made a legally flawed decision in ruling the First Amendment does not shield Daily Stormer publisher Andrew Anglin from being sued for his followers’ anti-Semitic harassment of a Jewish woman and her family in Montana.
Christensen’s decision allows Tanya Gersh to proceed with her claims that Anglin invaded her privacy, inflicted emotional distress on her and her family and violated Montana’s anti-intimidation law by calling on his followers to unleash a “troll storm” on her, her husband and her 12-year-old son.
2.) Free speech threat seen in prosecuting WikiLeaks' Assange
Pursing action against Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, is raising serious questions about free speech.
Many Democrats seethed when the radical transparency activist humiliated Hillary Clinton by publishing the content of her campaign chairman's inbox. Most Republicans haven't forgiven Assange for his publication of U.S. military and intelligence secrets. Much of the American media establishment holds him in contempt as well.
A person familiar with the situation confirmed that charges against Assange have in fact been filed under seal. The person spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the charges have not been publicly announced.
3.) A simple click could have far-reaching consequences for free speech on Twitter
Rep. Cheri Toalson Reisch, R-Hallsville, blocked Mike Campbell, a Columbia lawyer, on Twitter for sharing a tweet critical of her. Now, she has a lawsuit on her hands that she’s trying to dismiss.
Politicians blocking constituents on social media is prevalent nationally, and Reisch’s case could have far-reaching consequences, attorneys said.
Campbell’s lawsuit, filed in June, argues that Reisch committed viewpoint discrimination by blocking him after he retweeted a tweet from Rep. Kip Kendrick, D-Columbia. Attorneys debated whether Twitter — the social media platform where users post articles, share statements and hold conversations — is a public or private forum when used by an elected official.