There is an interesting proposed law in Missouri where lobbyists who have sex with state lawmakers or their aides would have to disclose that activity to the state ethics commission. Rep. Bart Korman wants such sexual relations to be reported as a “gift” on a monthly basis, though he is not requiring the couples to assign a dollar value on the gift. The measure addresses a real and long-standing concern about the use of sex to influence politicians. History is rife with such scandals. However, the measure would raise serious privacy and other constitutional issues.
Category: Media
The recent sexual assault in Cologne of women on New Year’s Eve has shocked the nation. As many as 1000 men, allegedly set upon women and made them run a gauntlet as they were grabbed, their clothes ripped, and their bodies groped. Police sources and witnesses have said that many were refugees — triggering renewed objections over a spate of rapes and assaults of women in the country attributed to recent immigrants. To make matters worse for the government, newspapers are reporting that one man told police “I am Syrian. You have to treat me kindly. Mrs Merkel invited me.” The result has been a rising tide of criticism of Merkel for her open-door policy. Yet, that criticism may now be muted by a move by the government to crackdown on anti-immigration comments as a form of “hate speech.” As we discussed today with the effort to ban Donald Trump, free speech is being rolled back in Europe under hate crime and anti-discrimination laws as an alarming rate. It is particularly worrisome when the government is under attack on an issue like immigration and responds by prosecuting people for such criticism. News reports indicate that 18 of the 31 known suspects from Cologne were asylum seekers, including “nine Algerians, eight Moroccans, five Iranians, four Syrians, an Iraqi, a Serbian, an American and two German nationals.
Continue reading “Germany Cracks Down On Anti-Immigration Speech”
We have previously discussed the alarming rollback on free speech rights in the West, particularly in England ( here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here). England is now a tragic example of how speech regulation and criminalization becomes insatiable — producing a down spiral as more and more speech is found intolerable or criminal. The most recent example is the call to ban Donald Trump from entry into the United Kingdom as someone guilty of hate speech. While I have criticized Trump’s statements about barring Muslims from entering the country, he is entitled to voice his views on immigration and participate in a debate about how we are going to handle both immigration and national security concerns. The chilling thing about this debate in Parliament is not that it will succeed in barring Trump but that it would not be in any way out of order with prior content-based sanctions.
Continue reading “Parliament To Debate Barring Donald Trump From Entry Into The United Kingdom”
President Barack Obama has made gun control a priority in 2016 and the latest area of confrontation with Congress. There is clearly a calculation that the public will support another area of conflict between the branches and the assertion of unilateral executive power. That is what makes a recent poll so interesting. Gallup found that “gun/gun control” ranked near the bottom of concerns for most Americans. How low? Try only two percent of those polled.
Continue reading “Gallup Poll: Only Two Percent Of Americans Rank Gun Control As Major Concern”
With the rising tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia over the execution of Sheikh Nimir al-Nimir, there is a wonderfully ironic element as Iran has accused Saudi Arabia of stifling free speech by a cleric who merely disagreed with the regime. Iran of course is the government that has beaten and killed protesters calling for basic rights. We have regularly commented on Saudi Arabia’s medieval Sharia system as well as Iran’s suppression of free speech. Both countries regularly decapitate people and hang or crucify people in the name of Islamic values. Now both countries are exchanging insults about how the other is an extremist regime.
We recently discussed the concern over the criminalization of speech in Israel. Now there is an added concern after Israel’s Education Ministry disqualified Dorit Rabinyan’s award winning “Gader Haya” (literally “Hedgegrow,” but known in English as “Borderline”)from being used in high schools. The reason? The novel describes a love story between an Israeli woman and a Palestinian man. The Education Ministry decided that the novel threatened “the identity and the heritage of students in every sector,” and the belief that “intimate relations between Jews and non-Jews threatens the separate identity.”
By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
With the increasing frequency of government censorship and take-down orders blocking content hosted on web servers, a consortium of internet stakeholders has proposed to the IETF an RFC Draft (recently published) proposing a standard error response given to clients that the web page or resource sought has been blocked for legal reasons.
The proposal uses the status code 451, a reference to Ray Bradbury’s book “Fahrenheit 451”.
Continue reading “Proposal To Establish HTTP Status Code 451 For Websites Blocked By Censorship”
The charges against Bill Cosby are now filed and Cosby is out on bail pending his aggravated assault trial. Below is my column on the trial and what will likely be a core question for the defense: should Bill Cosby testify? It is a common question in celebrity trials and many prefer silence to the stand.
Continue reading “The Cosby Charges: When Silence Speaks Loudly”
We have been discussing the continued rollback of civil liberties by our Asian ally, Thailand, including absurd prosecutions such as the recent arrest of a mechanic who merely “liked” a photo viewed disrespectful of the King’s dog. He appears however to be in the disgruntled one percent according to the military junta. The authoritarian government just released the type of poll that only a junta would find plausible: 99 percent of Thais are happy with the junta’s governance since it took power last year. Well, if you can’t believe a junta, who can you believe?
Continue reading “Thai Junta Proclaims 99 Percent Support From Public . . . In Its Own Poll”
I have previously written about my disagreement with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office decision to rescind federal trademark protections for the Redskins as a racially disparaging name as well as the underlying law used to strip the team of its trademark protection. The law allows for a small administrative office to effectively dictate the outcome of a long simmering societal debate over the team name. More importantly, the standard for determining what names or words are disparaging remains dangerously undefined with striking contradictions as we have previously discussed in permitted and disallowed trademarks. One of the cases that I have discussed involves an Asian-American rock band called The Slants, which was also barred by the office. Now the band has won a major victory not just for itself but also the first amendment in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. The Court struck down the part of the law allowing the denial of the registration of offensive trademarks. The case, which is likely to appealed to the Supreme Court, will have a major impact on the Redskins controversy.
President Obama once pledged that his government would be the most transparent in history — a claim that is often mocked by civil libertarians and other critics who accuse him of almost Nixonian secrecy policies and inclinations. That troubling record is playing out again before U.S District Court Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Administration continues to fight to withhold over 2,000 images of torture and abuse of detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan simply because it would make the United States look bad. Ironically, there is a transparent element to this case. Few Administration have been so transparently obvious in their use of classification rule to simply bar the disclosure of information that would be embarrassing to officials or the government. Usually, the Justice Department attempts to spin a tale of some other national security rationale for non-disclosure. Here, however, there is nothing even plausible to come up with. The Obama Administration simply wants to deep six the photos because people would be really angry if they saw what the government did, including photos that are believed to be far worse than those Abu Ghraib (like the one above).
Our close Asian ally, Thailand, continues to crush both free speech and political dissent under its draconian criminal code. Mechanic Thanakorn Siripaiboon, 27, is facing a potential of 37 years for allegedly insult King Bhumibol Adulyadej, 88, by “liking” a humorous photoshopped photo of the King’s dog and passing it along to his over 600 “friends.” That’s all it take in Thailand to face 37 years in jail . . . insulting the King’s dog. It is all part of what is called lèse-majesté governing royal insults but this is the first known extension of the law to royal pets.
Continue reading “Thai Mechanic Faces 37 Years For “Liking” Spoof Photo Of King’s Dog”
Below is my Sunday column in the Washington Post on Donald Trump’s proposal to ban Muslims from entry into the United States. Trump’s rhetoric has shocked many in his promises to unilaterally force sweeping changes regardless of Congress. Yet, Trump’s criticism of Congress and pledge to go it alone should be vaguely familiar for many. Both Obama and Trump advocate to use unilateral powers to change the immigration laws as a rejection of a “do nothing” Congress. Faced with opposition in Congress, President Obama insisted that he would order many of the very changes rejected by the legislative branch. Despite my agreement with President Obama on many of his policies, it is a dangerous and destabilizing legacy or a system based on the separation of powers. While these men may differ on their policy choices, the powers are the same. President Obama has been asserting many the powers referenced by Trump despite constitutional objections and losses in court like the Canning decision. For this reason, the objections from Obama supporters may ring a bit hollow for Trump supporters. While Trump may have coined “You’re fired” as an entertainment tag line, it was President Obama who fashioned it into a political doctrine in his rejection of Congress. This has been a role that Trump has spent years cultivating on reality shows. It is reality TV meets realpolitick. Below is the column.
Senior Chinese official Lu Wei has made news this week by assuring the world that there is no censorship in China. He should know, Lu is the chief censor in China. If you cannot believe a government censor, who can you believe?
Continue reading “Chinese Censor Assures World That There Is No Censorship In China”
We have another controversy over the regulation of speech on college campuses this week. Thaddeus Pryor has been suspended and banned from Colorado College for two years after he sent an anonymous reply on social media that was meant as a joke. Regardless of the fact that the joke was insulting and decidedly unfunny, it was an anonymous comment made by a student on the social media site Yik Yak without the use of university equipment or involvement. As such, it raises serious free speech implications in my view.