Comments by "RiteMo LawBks" (@ritemolawbks8012) on "The Humanist Report"
channel.
-
4
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ultimatedab743 If that's true, go to plead that in a court. If you really think that a legitimate Constitutional Claim, then don't rant about it on the internet.
You have to right to seek relief in a court of law. That's where you'll get your school on how the US Constitution works. This has nothing to do with law. This is not that complicated because The First Amendment reads:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
U.S. Const. amend. I.
If you, and other people confused about how Free Speech works, tried to petition the government or a court for a redress of your grievances regarding Twitter and politics, and were immediately censored and arrested by the state law enforcement or federal agents not wanting government leaders to be embarrassed, then I'd agree with you.
Elon Musk isn't a lawyer or an expert on Free Speech. He's been sanctioned in the past by the US Securities and Exchanges Commission ("SEC") for violating securities laws via his Tweets.
He's a talented businessman, but as soon as he starts talking about a topics he's uneducated on, he sounds like a fool. He's free to run Twitter, a private company, as long as it's consistent with the law, and the contracts and government ("FTC" and "SEC") settlements that are still binding him and Twitter.
Where he doesn't have influence is over the administration of law. If he wants to make public policy, then he should run for office. The audience is upset with his decision to insert himself into national politics, and his business decisions regarding Twitter. None of that is related to Free Speech.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1