How does The New York Times not get the First Amendment? The paper’s apparent reasoning: it’s bad for the White House and Democrats, and therefore dangerous and wrongheaded. And never mind that the First Amendment says the feds can’t restrict speech, nor (by implication) have third parties do that dirty work. And it’d be wrong even if we’d been wrong: The First Amendment has no “disinformation” exception, as decades of jurisprudence on speech make clear. That applies even to RFK Jr.’s bonkers arguments about the dangers of vaccines, which are now getting suppressed by YouTube.

Source: New York Times July 07, 2023 13:30 UTC