A round-up of the latest and best insight on the rise of illiberalism in the public discourse:
Pluribus: Suncor v Boulder: A backdoor assault on the First Amendment?
Next month, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, which grew out of a state lawsuit accusing the oil industry of lying about the climate risks of its products. Boulder wants billions in damages, and several dozen other jurisdictions have filed nearly identical suits.
Strictly speaking, the case isn’t a First Amendment dispute. But as we argue, it has profoundly important implications for free speech protections. If Boulder—and the dozens of state and local governments running copycat suits—get their way, companies could be punished for taking the “wrong” side of a scientific debate. Our takeaway:
Governments simply can’t be trusted to pick the correct conclusion in a scientific dispute.
Meagan O’Rourke: Animal Advocates Say a Florida Sheriff’s Office Blocked Them Online. Free Speech Lawyers Are Fighting Back.
Turns out you don’t need a foreign policy dispute to run afoul of the First Amendment — a shelter’s euthanasia rate will do just fine. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) sent a letter this week to Florida’s Polk County Sheriff’s Office (PCSO), which oversees the county’s animal control department, arguing its social media bans amount to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.
One critic, Vicky Quintanilla, says she was blocked two years ago after posting about the shelter’s high euthanasia rate.
The PCSO insists its accounts are merely “limited public forums” where moderators can restrict off-topic chatter but not viewpoints, a distinction its own policy doesn’t seem to respect, given its bans on “offensive” comments, “trolling” and anything that might “abuse.” The sheriff’s office said it had received FIRE’s letter but hadn’t yet reviewed it, though a spokesperson still offered this assurance:
[The PCSO does] “not engage in viewpoint or content discrimination.”
Toby Young: More Than 60,000 Arrested in Five Years for ‘Communications Offences’ in ‘Orwellian’ Policing Crackdown
Across the pond, a new Big Brother Watch report finds that at least 62,199 people were arrested in the UK for “communications offences” over the past five years. Some of that enforcement is defensible, like intervening on threatening messages in domestic violence cases. But the report’s complaint is about everything else swept up along the way. One case cited: West Midlands Police showed up at the home of a vulnerable teenage girl over a TikTok video she hadn’t even created, shared or commented on.
Writing in the Mail, Toby Young, director of the Free Speech Union, pointed out the obvious trade-off nobody in Whitehall seems to be making.
The police seem increasingly obsessed with catching thought criminals.
Around X
GB News shared former Conservative MP Louise Mensch’s reaction to the Big Brother Watch numbers. She didn’t mince words about how police discretion has been used.
FIRE also flagged its own letter to the Polk County Sheriff’s Office last week, warning that blocking constituents over policy complaints is the kind of thing that gets a government agency sued.
It’s not censorship, it’s just regulating the “information landscape.” Color us skeptical.
