Cofounder Dreamwidth / disabled queer cat lady / running social media since before it was "social media" and Trust & Safety since the dawn of time / do not cite the deep magic to me, I wrote it / no, I'm allergic to that, too
We shared this photo with Dad and he said "is she getting bigger or are the boxes getting smaller?" so Sarah got out the tape measure and said "it's 6" x 10" x Ginny" because she will definitely go to great lengths for a joke
"Now it's time for the best part: where I put the piping hot muffins in front of you and watch you try to summon the willpower not to eat them until they cool off."
Final brag count, having read the decision: Two namedrops, three citations to my declaration, woohoo!
A great decision, and I'm pleased to see that the judge joined the judge in the Ohio suit in going straight for strict scrutiny, no waffling involved.
Also, lolllll.
guys, the reason nobody addressed that but you is because a) the common carriage argument is FUCKING BATSHIT b) even if they WERE common carriers, which they aren't, sites STILL wouldn't be 100% prevented from moderating content
On to the concurrences. Barrett immediately points out exactly why Friday's decision in Loper Bright was fucking bullshit! Except she doesn't see that she did. (Sorry for the giant margins in the screenshot there, sigh.)
This is the core of why I'm so frustrated with this decision even though, overall, it is relatively positive and will be helpful. The Court just spent 30-some pages explaining why the plainly legitimate sweep of the laws are unconstitutional!
Another helpful restatement of "core First Amendment protections for speech do not go away just because the speech in question happens on a computer, and the First Amendment prohibits the government from telling a private party what speech it can allow".
It is really common in these cases for courts to punt on ruling whether strict or intermediate scrutiny applies because the laws fail even intermediate scrutiny. More rulings that these laws fail intermediate scrutiny are always welcome!
Again: excellent to get in the record, always love a good "fuck you, no" to the Fifth Circuit, but once again, this should have been dispositive right here
A very welcome and clear statement that algorithmic timeline curation *is* editorial discretion as protected by Tornillo that is also going to be useful and frequently cited (but again! this should have been dispositive!)
Another very useful and helpful statement about editorial discretion: you can't argue that it's not editorial discretion just because someone might believe the speech is not the site's, because the aggregate of third party speech allowed vs removed demonstrates the site's overall editorial viewpoint
We then cover two cases that distinguish Tornillo, and I repeat my assertion that the general opinion of every subsequent court is "...can we all just agree that Pruneyard was a bad call and decide to never speak of it again?"
bsky.app/profile/raha...
(The reason I am keeping a running tally of the Pruneyard references is that Pruneyard is like literally the only case that's on the state's side, and it's been narrowed down by subsequent jurisprudence that literally everyone's attitude to it is "let's just ... agree not to talk about Pruneyard")
I do appreciate a good "we're remanding this for other reasons, but don't let that make you think you were actually *right*, Fifth Circuit", even if I'd have preferred a more conclusive ruling: it *is* helpful to get this established.
This is such a fucking frustrating argument. The Court completely misses that the purpose of a request for injunction based on a facial challenge is to prevent having to build the systems to allow for compliance with a plainly unconstitutional law.
If anyone wants to know why I'm a little cranky on the internet sometimes, "getting my own dialect mansplained to me by someone who has literally never met me and then called illiterate" is only about the sixth most deserved block of the last few weeks
I see the 2013 NYT dialect quiz is going around again! I am one of those people whose origin can be pinpointed in like two questions, lol. (I grew up about 20 miles west of the three cities highlighted.)
