AP Photo/John Raoux
The never-ending battle against leftist social media autocracies Twitter and Facebook, principal among them continues, as conservatives; the prime targets of the mercurial wrath of Dorsey-Zuckerberg Inc., grapple with how best to put an end to their suppression and outright censorship of conservative content not to mention their unbridled power.
A headline-making event last week only served to throw additional fuel on the fire.
As my RedState colleague Nick Arama reported last week, Republican lawmakers ratcheted up their call for the federal government to step in and break up Facebook after the Facebook Oversight Board upheld the social media giant’s indefinite ban on Donald Trump, despite also finding that an indefinite ban would violate Facebook’s own rules.
Justice Thomas Calls out Supreme Court s Hypocrisy in Talking About Abortion theepochtimes.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from theepochtimes.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Section 230’s Wild West Internet policy and law empowers Big Tech to cancel and deplatform any competitor or dissenter, even the President of the United States, with impunity.
Section 230 warrants repeal because it created, and empowers, two different types of problematic power-without-accountability to customers, competition, government or the courts.
Section 230’s extraordinary unaccountability advantages for Internet companies are an out-of-control, Big Tech monopoly-making machine.
There is no antitrust fix for Big Tech monopolization without first, or simultaneously, repealing Section 230, the evident root cause of, and superpower behind, Big Tech’s evident monopolistic impunity.
Section 230’s Wild West Internet policy and law empowers Big Tech to cancel and deplatform any competitor or dissenter, even the President of the United States, with impunity.
WASHINGTON – Three Democratic lawmakers are pressing Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett to recuse herself from one of the court s highest profile cases this term because of her ties to the conservative nonprofit that filed the appeal.
A foundation associated with Americans for Prosperity, which acknowledged spending seven figures on advertising to support Barrett during her confirmation battle last fall, has brought a case that will be argued at the nation s highest court next week challenging a requirement that it disclose major donors to state regulators in California.
In a three-page letter reviewed by USA TODAY, the lawmakers assert the Americans for Prosperity campaign in support of Barrett represents the appearance of a conflict in the pending dispute involving the group s public charity, the Americans for Prosperity Foundation. Both groups are backed by Republican megadonor Charles Koch.
That has vexed immigrant advocates and experts who note the White House proposed a bill this year to address the same issue involved in the case. The proposed U.S. Citizenship Act, which faces long odds, would let Sanchez and Gonzalez apply for green cards given their current status – no matter how they entered the country. Look, this is a no brainer, said Paul Wickham Schmidt, a Georgetown University law professor and former immigration judge. Why waste time on it? The administration has indicated they d like to regularize many [TPS beneficiaries] and.instead they re defending a gimmick cooked up by Stephen Miller, Trump s onetime policy adviser.