(Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Donald Trump has said that he and Twitter are never, never, never getting back together. He insists that hes perfectly happy to bleat into the ether on his own website, while occasionally truthing on his knock-off Truth Social platform. And yet, hes suing Twitter demanding to have his account reinstated, and has gone so far as to file an appeal after US District Judge James Donato unceremoniously dropkicked his idiotic lawsuit last month.

The theory of Trumps Twitter LOLsuit and its giggling siblings filed against Meta and YouTube is that the social media platforms were acting as government agents when they nixed his accounts. His lawyers actually argued with a straight face that the tech companies were conscripted into government service after Democrats threatened to ditch Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. (It never gets any less insane, no matter how many times you type it.)

Never mind that conservatives like Senator Josh Hawley have been among the loudest critics of the law which immunizes internet platforms for user-generated content. Now is not the time to get hung up on the fact that Trump himself vetoed the $740 million National Defense Authorization Act in 2020 because Congress refused to nuke Section 230. Thats neither here nor there! Trump insisted that the tech companies were so terrified of Rep. Adam Schiff that they swung into action to censor conservatives, and that this constitutes a grievous violation of his First Amendment rights.

In the event, Judge Donato was singularly unimpressed with the argument, and, frankly with the lawyering, too. Here he is marveling that a federal practitioner can be unaware that the Twiqbal standard requiring that the facts alleged must be actually plausible applies to all federal civil cases.

Plaintiffs make the odd assertion that these pleading standards apply only in antitrust conspiracy actions. Dkt. No. 145 at 6 n.7. Twombly and Iqbal expressed no such limitation, and their standards have been applied to a myriad of Rule 12(b)(6) motions in non-antitrust actions in every federal district and circuit court. A scant minute of online research makes this abundantly clear.

But Trump isnt going to take this lying down! Today he noticed an appeal to the Ninth Circuit of the dismissal of his case. Those activist liberal judges cant cancel culture Donald Trump! The mans got rubes to fleece with claims that hes raising cash for his legal defense, and hes not letting some trial judge from the land of fruit and nuts get in his way.

Next stop San Francisco, and then its on to SCOTUS. Shit, you can get five justices to bite on anything these days, right?

Trump v. Twitter [Docket via Court Listener]

Elizabeth Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics.

See more here:

Trump Appeals Dismissal Of Preposterous Suit Against Twitter For Tortious Deplatforming - Above the Law

Starting July 1, the Sunshine State will have new laws that could affect a host of different issues from what Floridians learn in school to how loudly they can play music in their vehicles.

HB 1557 - Parental Rights in Education AKA Dont Say Gay bill

This law will require district school boards to notify students parents of involvement in critical decisions affecting the students mental, emotional or physical well-being.

The law also prohibits classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in certain grade levels and for school districts to notify parents of healthcare services.

For more information, visit.

[RELATED: Heres what Floridas Stop WOKE law could mean for your childs education]

Ad

HB 5001 - General Appropriation Act

The bill will provide a minimum wage increase to state employees and law enforcement while also providing tax suspensions on gas, diapers and school supplies.

It will also provide money for buildings and other improvements in state agencies.

For more information, visit.

HB 577 - Tenant Safety, Miyas Law

This law will require the apartment operators to provide tenants with a reasonable notice for repairs in dwelling units.

It will also enforce stricter background checks and the use of master keys.

For more information, visit.

[TRENDING: Florida expands Bright Futures scholarship eligibility. Heres whats new | No smoking on the beach? Daytona Beach Shores considers ban | Become a News 6 Insider (its free!)]

Ad

Florida statue 316.3045 - Loud Music in Vehicles

This law will allow law enforcement officers to give tickets to drivers playing music too loudly in their cars.

Drivers will be unable to play music from a vehicle that is at a distance of 25 feet or more.

The law will also allow officers to ticket drivers for playing music too loudly in areas around churches, schools or hospitals.

For more information, visit.

HB 5 - Reducing Fetal and Infant Mortality AKA 15 Weeks Abortion Ban

This law prohibits a physician from performing an abortion if the fetus is past 15 weeks, rendering late-term abortion services illegal.

The law provides some exceptions in cases of rape, incest or human trafficking.

Ad

For more information, visit.

HB 1421 - School Safety

This law requires school to create a plan to reunify families in case of school evacuations and to have law enforcement officers ready to respond to emergencies like school shootings and to be present in shooting drills.

It also will require schools to provide annual incident reports that are easily digestible to readers.

Lastly, it also requires school officers to take mental health intervention training and school districts to train its staff in youth mental health awareness.

For more information, visit.

HB 105 - Regulation of Smoking by Counties and Municipalities

The Florida Clean Indoor Air Act will regulate vaping and tobacco smoking in public places in Florida.

Ad

The laws goal is to protect the public from the health hazards of secondhand tobacco smoke.

Smoking will be restricted in public beaches and parks. The law will also allow school districts to regulate smoking on school property and local governments to restrict the use of vapes.

For more information, visit.

SB 1054 - Financial Literacy Instruction in Public Schools

This law requires that students starting in grade 9 must earn one-half credit in personal financial literacy and money management to receive their high school diplomas.

For more information, visit.

HB 7065 - Child Welfare

This law will create programs to provide guidance and resources for fathers to inspire them to have positive involvement with their children.

Ad

It will also provide mentorship for fatherless children and funding to help children in the foster care and juvenile justice system.

Lastly, this bill declares the month of June as Responsible Fatherhood Month.

For more information, visit.

HB 7 - Individual Freedom

This law prohibits the indoctrination of students in systematic racism or to a particular point of view inconsistent with the principles of individual freedom.

According to this law, the principles of individual freedoms mean that all individuals are equal before the law and have inalienable rights.

This bill also restricts how race-related instruction in workplace.

For more information, visit.

HB 7061 - Taxation

This law will provide tax reliefs for back-to-school season, recreation and disaster preparedness.

Ad

It will also give a tax breaks to companies who hire interns and create affordable housing.

HB 7061 will provide tax credit to companies that give to charities providing counseling for families.

For more information, visit.

SB 7072 - Social Media Platforms

This law will prohibit a social media platform from de-platforming a candidate for political office or journalistic enterprise.

The Florida Elections Commission is going to fine media platforms $250,000 per day for suspending the accounts of candidates for statewide office and $25,000 per day for any other candidate.

For more information, visit.

SB 1890 - Campaign Financing

This law puts a $3,000 contribution limit on political committees.

Ad

It also prohibits a candidate from donating surplus campaign funds to a charitable organization in which he or she is employed.

For more information, visit.

HB 7045 - School Choice

This law expands the eligibility for K-12 scholarships for students to attend private schools.

This will allow students with disabilities to have scholarships that will allow them to choose public or private schools.

Also, it will allow low-income students to attend schools that their parents otherwise could not afford.

Lastly, it also expands program eligibility to include students who are dependents of a member of the U.S. Armed Forces and adopted children.

For more information, visit.

HB 529 - Moments of Silence in Public Schools

Ad

This law will require a moment of silence to be set aside for students during the first-period classroom in all grades.

It will require teachers to set aside two minutes daily in which students may not interfere with other students participation.

For more information, visit.

HB 5 - Civic Education Curriculum

This law requires the Department of Education to develop or approve an integrated civic education curriculum for grades K - 12.

The curriculum should help students development of civic responsibility and knowledge, according to the legislation.

For more information, visit.

HB 233 - Postsecondary Education

This law prohibits the State Board of Education from shielding students, staff or faculty from certain speech.

Ad

It will require the Board of Education to perform annual surveys on freedom and viewpoint diversity.

For more information, visit.

SB 1028 - Education

This law creates the Fairness in Womens Sports Act, which provides female athletes with opportunities to demonstrate their skills when participating in athletic endeavors.

The bill specifies athletic teams or sports designated for females, women or girls may not be open to students of the male sex. Officials will take a students biological sex as established on their birth certificate as their actual sex when considering who should participate in the athletic events.

For more information, visit.

SB 88 - Farming Operations

This law protects reasonable agricultural activities conducted on farm land from inconvenient lawsuits.

Ad

It will protect farm operations including, but not limited to, noise, smoke, odors, dust, fumes, particle emissions or vibration.

For more information, visit.

SB 148 - Beverage Law

This law allows certain food service establishments to sell or deliver alcoholic beverages off-location under certain circumstances.

It will allow customers to take alcohol out of the restaurant and it will revised the requirements for the sale of alcoholic beverages by certain vendors.

For more information, visit.

Originally posted here:

Loud music and take-out alcohol. Here are all the new Florida laws going into effect - WKMG News 6 & ClickOrlando

Donald Trumps presidency included many transgressive behaviors which were rationalized by his followers. A study published in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology explores the roles of group prototypicality and identity advancement in how supporters downplayed and accepted Trumps harmful behaviors.

People in political leadership have a lot of power and have the potential to greatly affect the social, economic, and social state of the country and even the entire world. When leaders partake in transgressive behavior that violates social, moral, or legal norms, the consequences can be grave. Unfortunately, leaders like Donald Trump can maintain support from their base despite their harmful behaviors.

Previous research supports this and shows leniency from their followers. This study seeks to further this research by understanding the roles of identity advancement and group prototypicality in this leniency.

Identity advancement refers to the belief that a politician stands up for Americans, acts as a champion for Americans, promotes the interests of Americans, and has the best interests of Americans at heart. Group prototypicality, on the other hand, refers to the belief that a politician represents what is characteristic of Americans, is typical of Americans, and stands for what Americans have in common.

Researcher Ben Davies and his colleagues utilized a longitudinal study that employed 3 waves. Wave 1 occurred a week before the 2020 election, wave 2 occurred 2 days after the initial wave, and wave 3 occurred the day after Joe Bidens inauguration. Wave 1 included 200 Republicans, wave 2 retained 175 participants, and wave 3 retained 102 participants. Wave 1 assessed initial perceptions of Trump, demographics, prototypicality, and identity advancement. Wave 2 assessed the perceived ethicalness of transgressive behavior when committed by Trump or not committed by Trump. Wave 3 assessed prototypicality and identity advancement following Trump leaving office and being replaced by Biden.

Results showed that Republicans downplayed Trumps unethical behavior, but this was related to his identity advancement and not related to his group prototypicality. Trump losing the election did not increase his followers beliefs that he behaved unethically or decrease their perception of his group prototypicality or identity advancement. Additionally, participants did perceive Trumps behavior as less unethical than the same behaviors in a neutral subject. This was significant for all 3 behaviors studied including nepotism, sharing of false information, and abuse of power.

The extent to which group members downplay the transgressive behavior of their leader has worrying implications for leadership, the researchers said. Ultimately, it appears that devout followers are willing to explain away even the most serious breaches of law and morality by their leaders. As the US Capitol riots illustrate, the rationalization of a leaders transgressive behavior and continued support for them can culminate in serious attacks on democracy and social order.

This study made important progress in understanding how base followers justify and interpret transgressive behavior. Despite this, it has limitations. This study focuses solely on Donald Trump, a very controversial politician. Arguably, there has never been a more divisive president in the United States. These results would potentially not generalize using a different politician. Additionally, very salient events occurred between waves 2 and 3, including the Capitol riots and attempt to overturn the election, which is difficult to control for.

As well as addressing these limitations, future studies should also explore how to mitigate the support of transgressive leaders, and how their behavior can be reframed in a way that minimizes its downplaying among supporters, the researchers said. One potential avenue is to explore how de-platforming such transgressive leaders limits their ability to reframe their behavior in a desired light.

The study, Donald Trump and the rationalization of transgressive behavior: The role of group prototypicality and identity advancement, was authored by Ben Davies, Carola Leicht, and Dominic Abrams.

Link:

Study suggests identity advancement plays a key role in the downplaying of Trump's unethical behaviors - PsyPost

Yesterday, the Supreme Court voted to uphold a Mississippi abortion ban and overturn Roe v. Wade, ending abortion access in some states and triggering impending bans in others. The decision wont end abortion in America, but in many places it will move the procedure underground and, based on recent history, online.

Understandably, abortion advocates have focused on surveillance issues in the immediate aftermath of the ruling, concerned about states using online records for criminal prosecutions. But theres also a fight brewing over how and where advocates will be able to share abortion information online. If a procedure is illegal, then states could claim content enabling that procedure is illegal too raising thorny questions for platforms and activists alike.

Abortion bans in states like Texas already have provisions to penalize people seen as aiding and abetting the procedure, and some anti-abortion activists are pushing to define this as simply describing how to self-manage an abortion. As The Appeal noted earlier this week, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) has proposed model legislation that would prohibit offering instructions over the telephone, the internet, or any other medium of communication or hosting or maintaining a website, or providing internet service, that encourages or facilitates efforts to obtain an illegal abortion.

The language seems aimed at sites like Plan C, which offers detailed information about obtaining misoprostol and mifepristone for self-managed abortion. Many news outlets, including Verge sister site The Cut, have also published detailed information about the subject. Broad terms like hosting would even seemingly let states go after internet infrastructure providers that support sites like Plan C or social networks that they use to spread information.

Civil liberties advocates assert that this would be unconstitutional. This kind of legislation raises serious First Amendment concerns, said Knight First Amendment Institute executive director Jameel Jaffer. We intend to consider challenging any legislation that uses todays Supreme Court decision as a justification for new limitations on protected speech, or new forms of surveillance.

Motivated prosecutors may still try to punish outlets that share information, arguing that the material is specifically intended to help others break the law, and drag them into expensive and protracted legal cases even if they ultimately prevail. Explaining what abortion is, where you can get one, advocating for a persons right or ability to get an abortion all these things are general truthful information that cannot be prosecuted without violating the First Amendment, says ACLU counsel Jennifer Granick. The risk is that prosecutors will take those private conversations where people are exchanging information and try to cast those as criminal encounters. And that will be something that were going to probably end up having to fight.

Activists and health care providers have an incentive to fight these battles but the digital platforms they use might not. Opponents of legal abortion could threaten any company involved in hosting speech with lawsuits if they allow abortion-related communications. Potential targets range from social networks like Facebook, where its easy to connect with people seeking abortions, to infrastructure providers like content delivery networks (CDNs), which provide critical logistical support for independent websites.

Right now, platforms have an easy answer to threats: Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Section 230 shields apps and websites from being considered the publisher or speaker of user-generated content, protecting them from liability over hosting it. Unlike a First Amendment defense, it doesnt require fighting over whether the content in question is illegal, reducing the legal burden of lawsuits. The thing about Section 230 is you dont have to demonstrate that its First Amendment protected speech, which can take a long, long time sometimes in litigation, says Granick. Theres an exception for conduct that violates federal criminal law, but not violations of state laws like the current abortion bans.

Still, Section 230 has become increasingly unpopular among Republicans and Democrats alike. Federal bills like the EARN IT Act and the SAFE TECH Act have proposed chipping away at its protections, while Texas and Florida have passed laws on the premise that Section 230 shouldnt stop states from implementing their own content moderation laws. In 2018, then-President Donald Trump signed FOSTA-SESTA, which removed protections for material related to sex work, with support from both parties.

Critics of Section 230 have cited real cases of sites (usually not the typical Big Tech targets) using it to avoid responsibility for encouraging nonconsensual pornography or defamatory lies. Many proposals for fixing this, however, contain broad carveouts that could be exploited to make learning about abortion harder even if thats not the goal.

Research suggests FOSTA-SESTA led to a mass deplatforming of sex workers online, whether or not they were directly posting illegal content, and the ripple effects made it harder to operate services like online sex education. Further weakening the law could have similar chilling effects on abortion information too, with sites deciding to err on the side of caution rather than risk legal liability.

Sometimes people say, well, whats the problem? says Granick of Section 230 carveouts. For instance, if we have an exception for federal crimes, why shouldnt we also have an exception to allow liability for state crimes? And this is like Exhibit A in why we dont want to open up liability to state criminal provisions.

Fight for the Future director Evan Greer says the death of Roe adds dangerous side effects to current proposals. Even well-intentioned changes to Section 230, like those proposed in the SAFE TECH Act or Justice Against Malicious Algorithms Act, could unleash a wave of lawsuits from anti-abortion activists (who are already lawyered up, litigious, and highly motivated to get content about abortion access scrubbed from the internet), says Greer. Companies could respond by minimizing their risk, resulting in anything from crowdfunding sites banning abortion access funds to online social spaces shutting down people who try to arrange travel and logistics for cross-state abortions.

Weakening Section 230 would be a disaster in a post-Roe environment, Greer continues.

There are good reasons to be wary of organizing abortion access on major platforms, like leaving a data trail that could be used by police in prosecutions. But overzealous bans would just make finding health information harder. For lawmakers who have backed keeping abortion accessible, thats a risk any future Section 230 reform will have to reckon with.

See the original post here:

The brewing fight to keep abortion info online - The Verge