Showing archive for: “First Amendment”
NetChoice, Net Neutrality, and the Future of the First Amendment Online
In an expected decision (but with a somewhat unexpected coalition), the U.S. Supreme Court has moved 5 to 4 to vacate an order issued early last month by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which stayed an earlier December 2021 order from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas enjoining Texas’ ... NetChoice, Net Neutrality, and the Future of the First Amendment Online
The Market for Speech Governance: Free Speech Strikes Back?
The tentatively pending sale of Twitter to Elon Musk has been greeted with celebration by many on the right, along with lamentation by some on the left, regarding what it portends for the platform’s moderation policies. Musk, for his part, has announced that he believes Twitter should be a free-speech haven and that it needs ... The Market for Speech Governance: Free Speech Strikes Back?
Conservatism and the Section 230 Debate: Applying First Principles
Over at the Federalist Society’s blog, there has been an ongoing debate about what to do about Section 230. While there has long-been variety in what we call conservatism in the United States, the most prominent strains have agreed on at least the following: Constitutionally limited government, free markets, and prudence in policy-making. You would ... Conservatism and the Section 230 Debate: Applying First Principles
How does antitrust measure nonprice effects like political bias?
In the latest congressional hearing, purportedly analyzing Google’s “stacking the deck” in the online advertising marketplace, much of the opening statement and questioning by Senator Mike Lee and later questioning by Senator Josh Hawley focused on an episode of alleged anti-conservative bias by Google in threatening to demonetize The Federalist, a conservative publisher, unless they ... How does antitrust measure nonprice effects like political bias?
Senator Hawley’s Unconstitutional, Unconservative Attack on the Internet
Twitter’s decision to begin fact-checking the President’s tweets caused a long-simmering distrust between conservatives and online platforms to boil over late last month. This has led some conservatives to ask whether Section 230, the ‘safe harbour’ law that protects online platforms from certain liability stemming from content posted on their websites by users, is allowing ... Senator Hawley’s Unconstitutional, Unconservative Attack on the Internet
First Amendment Conflict of Visions Redux: The Case of Facebook’s Oversight Board and the Threat of Antitrust Action
In the wake of the launch of Facebook’s content oversight board, Republican Senator Josh Hawley and FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr, among others, have taken to Twitter to levy criticisms at the firm and, in the process, demonstrate just how far the Right has strayed from its first principles around free speech and private property. For ... First Amendment Conflict of Visions Redux: The Case of Facebook’s Oversight Board and the Threat of Antitrust Action
The Australian approach to “consumer protection” policy is a threat to consumer welfare and free speech
The US Senate Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy, and Consumer Rights recently held hearings to see what, if anything, the U.S. might learn from the approaches of other countries regarding antitrust and consumer protection. US lawmakers would do well to be wary of examples from other jurisdictions, however, that are rooted in different legal and ... The Australian approach to “consumer protection” policy is a threat to consumer welfare and free speech
A Judicial Nod to Empirically-Based Regulation
The cause of basing regulation on evidence-based empirical science (rather than mere negative publicity) – and of preventing regulatory interference with First Amendment commercial speech rights – got a judicial boost on February 26. Specifically, in National Association of Wheat Growers et al. v. Zeise (Monsanto Case), a California federal district court judge preliminarily enjoined ... A Judicial Nod to Empirically-Based Regulation
The Demise of Lanham Act Trademark Disparagement Limitations Promotes Sound Free Market Economic Principles
Background On June 19, in Matal v. Tam, the U.S. Supreme Court (Justice Gorsuch did not participate in the case) affirmed the Federal Circuit’s ruling that the Lanham Act’s “disparagement clause” is unconstitutional under the First Amendment’s free speech clause. The Patent and Trademark Office denied the Slants’ (an Asian rock group) federal trademark registration, ... The Demise of Lanham Act Trademark Disparagement Limitations Promotes Sound Free Market Economic Principles
The FTC Takes on “Petitioning” of Government as an Anticompetitive Exclusionary Tactic
Background Some of the most pernicious and welfare-inimical anticompetitive activity stems from the efforts of firms to use governmental regulation to raise rivals’ costs or totally exclude them from the market (see, for example, here). The surest cure to such economic harm is, of course, the elimination or reform of anticompetitive government laws and regulations, ... The FTC Takes on “Petitioning” of Government as an Anticompetitive Exclusionary Tactic
Sixth Circuit’s Decision Rejecting FCC Preemption of State Restrictions on Municipal Broadband Ownership Strikes a Blow in Favor of the Rule of Law (But a Broader Problem Remains)
The American concept of “the rule of law” (see here) is embodied in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and in the constitutional principles of separation of powers, an independent judiciary, a government under law, and equality of all before the law (see here). It holds that the executive ... Sixth Circuit’s Decision Rejecting FCC Preemption of State Restrictions on Municipal Broadband Ownership Strikes a Blow in Favor of the Rule of Law (But a Broader Problem Remains)
Welcome guest blogger David Olson
I’m delighted to announce that David Olson will be guest blogging at Truth on the Market this summer. David is an Associate Professor at Boston College Law School. He teaches antitrust, patents, and intellectual property law. Professor Olson’s writing has been cited in Supreme Court and other legal opinions. Olson came to Boston College from Stanford ... Welcome guest blogger David Olson
