Polls: Society & Politics

SCOTUS handed the Biden administration a major practical victory on Wednesday, rejecting a Republican challenge that sought to prevent the government from contacting social media platforms to combat what it said was misinformation.

The court ruled that the states and users who had challenged those interactions had not sNO STANDING TO SUEue.

The decision, by a 6-to-3 vote, left for another day fundamental questions about what limits the First Amendment imposes on the government’s power to influence the technology companies that are the main gatekeepers of information in the internet era.

The case arose from a barrage of communications from administration officials urging platforms to take down posts on topics like the coronavirus vaccine and claims of election fraud. The attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, both Republicans, sued, along with three doctors, the owner of a right-wing website that frequently traffics in conspiracy theories and an activist concerned that Facebook had suppressed her posts on the supposed side effects of the coronavirus vaccine

“The plaintiffs, without any concrete link between their injuries and the defendants’ conduct, ask us to conduct a review of the yearslong communications between dozens of federal officials, across different agencies, with different social media platforms, about different topics,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the majority. “This court’s standing doctrine prevents us from exercising such general legal oversight of the other branches of government.”

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil M. Gorsuch, dissented.
“For months,” Justice Alito wrote, “high-ranking government officials placed unrelenting pressure on Facebook to suppress Americans’ free speech. Because the court unjustifiably refuses to address this serious threat to the First Amendment, I respectfully dissent.”

The North Carolina Republicans surely think so:

https://www.wral.com/story/nc-budget-would-add-political-pressure-to-prosecutors-not-to-dismiss-charges-against-protesters/21488473/

Facts that would be undisputed were humans able to know them. And indeed we get very close with the scientific method.

But I think a good portion of Americans don’t think there is ANY actual facts. Strangely.

Trump voters: would you leave your own daughter alone with Trump for a while? Please be honest.

Quote:
"You graduate from a college, I think you should get automatically, as part of your diploma, a green card to be able to stay in this country, and that includes junior colleges, too," Trump said during the appearance."

Immigration has been Trump’s signature issue during his 2024 bid to return to the White House. His suggestion that he would offer green cards — documents that confer a pathway to U. S. citizenship — to potentially hundreds of thousands of foreign graduates would represent a sweeping expansion of America’s immigration system that sharply diverges from his most common messages on foreigners.

fox59.com/.../

From my point of view, it sounds good on paper, but the main problem is that it allows any ignorant individual or individuals who are willfully stupid to vote and have their votes matter just as much as those with real world adulting experience and enough brain cells to understand the consequences involving higher taxes or inflation.

Considering the psychological and emotional rewards we receive from helping others, can any action be completely devoid of self-interest?

So they can be charged with perjury if they are found lying.