Worlds first e-passport that meets security needs of quantum computing era: Report The Hindu
Continued here:
Worlds first e-passport that meets security needs of quantum computing era: Report - The Hindu
What Is the First Amendment and What Does It Do? – VOA
What does the First Amendment say?
The First Amendment states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The freedoms in the First Amendment include the freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly, and the right to petition the government.
What does the First Amendment do?
The First Amendment is one of the most important amendments for the protection of democracy.
Freedom of religion allows people to believe and practice whatever religion they want. Freedom of speech and press allows people to voice their opinions publicly and to publish them without the government stopping them. Freedom of assembly allows people to gather in groups as long as they are peaceful. And the right to petition the government makes it possible for people to lobby the government, point out where it does not follow its own laws, and to sue if a wrong has occurred.
When was it created?
The First Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights. To protect individual rights, the framers of the U.S. Constitution added 10 amendments to the document in 1791, three years after the Constitution was ratified.
Are there exceptions to the freedoms in the First Amendment?
There are limits to the freedoms in the First Amendment as peoples individual rights must be balanced against the rights of society.
For example, a person cannot force the tenets of his or her religion on others while trying to practice that religion. Similarly, harmful speech, such as yelling fire in a crowded room, is not protected speech, nor is publishing a lie that causes harm to someone. Also, different types of speech have different amounts of freedom. Political speech is considered different than commercial speech, which includes advertisements.
Who determines what is protected?
That is where the courts come in. The meaning of the First Amendment has been the subject of disputes over the years and continuing interpretation by the courts.
Landmark Supreme Court cases involving the First Amendment have dealt with the rights of citizens to protest U.S. wars, burn the U.S. flag, and the publication of classified government documents.
How did the decision about CNN reporter Jim Acosta relate to the First Amendment?
The judge in the case involving CNN reporter Jim Acosta did not rule on the overall First Amendment issues involved in the matter, but instead ruled only on the Fifth Amendment issues, which grants people the right to due process.
The judges ruling today hinged on process or really lack of process that CNNs reporter Jim Acosta was given, Georgetown law professor Joshua Geltzer told VOA.
He said that although the case was not technically a First Amendment case, it was about the free press.
Ultimately, when you are looking at due process, you are looking at the interests at stake of the government and of the individual whom the government is taking some action in relation to, Geltzer said.
The reporter wasnt given an opportunity to go through some sort of process that might allow him to be treated fairly by the government as is required in many contexts when the government takes away something of value, he added.
Excerpt from:
Elon Musk and Tucker Carlson Don’t Understand the First Amendment – The Atlantic
- Elon Musk and Tucker Carlson Don't Understand the First Amendment The Atlantic
- Rep. Jim Jordan: Big Tech Censorship Proves The Left No Longer Believes In The First Amendment FOX News Radio
- No, You Do Not Have a Constitutional Right to Post Hunter Biden's Dick Pic on Twitter The Bulwark
- Khanna Emailed Twitter Free Speech Concerns Over Hunter Biden Laptop Business Insider
- Released Twitter emails show how employees debated how to handle 2020 New York Post Hunter Biden story CNN
- View Full Coverage on Google News
See the rest here:
Elon Musk and Tucker Carlson Don't Understand the First Amendment - The Atlantic
A First Amendment for Everyone – Reason
- A First Amendment for Everyone Reason
- Colorado web designers First Amendment challenge will test the scope of state anti-discrimination laws SCOTUSblog
- 303 Creative v. Elenis Isnt About LGBTQ Rights The Atlantic
- The Christian right is at the Supreme Court with a big attack on LGBTQ rights in 303 Creative v. Elenis Vox.com
- For Artists, The First Amendment Protects The Right Not To Speak The Federalist
- View Full Coverage on Google News
Visit link:
Medina officials propose new legislation for flying flags on city property – News 5 Cleveland WEWS
@micsolana If This Isn’t a Violation of the Constitution’s First Amendment, What Is? – Latest Tweet by Elon – LatestLY
The Pros And Cons Of Artificial Intelligence – Forbes
- The Pros And Cons Of Artificial Intelligence Forbes
- How to Invest in Artificial Intelligence MarketBeat
- What is Artificial Intelligence and how does it work? Telefnica
- Keep a close eye on use of artificial intelligence | HeraldNet.com The Daily Herald
- What are the benefits and drawbacks of artificial intelligence? Dataconomy
- View Full Coverage on Google News
Follow this link:
The Pros And Cons Of Artificial Intelligence - Forbes
Artificial Intelligence Needs To Speak The Language Of Business, Not The Other Way Around – Forbes
Four brilliant executions of Artificial Intelligence that you did not know about – Economic Times
FBI and White House Slapped Down By Judge in Major Censorship Case
Are the wheels finally coming off the White Houses censorship train? Its too soon to say for sure, but the Biden administration and the FBI got slapped down by a federal judge on Wednesday in a landmark case centering on the issue.
The judge has ruled that the FBI cant shield special agent Elvis Chan from being deposed in a lawsuit brought by Missouri AG (and soon-to-be senator) Eric Schmitt and Louisiana AG Jeff Landry.
Officials in Louisiana and Missouri recently launched a lawsuit against the Biden administration seeking information about alleged collusion between the FBI, the DoJ, and other agencies with social media companies to censor information unflattering to the White House. Lawyers for the White House attempted to prevent some of the depositions from taking place, including that of FBI special agent Elvis Chan. Agent Chan had been identified as having worked directly with Meta to remove certain news stories on Facebook. But U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana shot down the request, allowing the depositions to go forward. Needless to say, there are probably some very nervous people biting their fingernails in the White House this week.
As RedState previously reported, Meta (Facebook) was at the center of censoring the Hunter Biden story prior to the 2020 election, possibly swinging the outcome. Its founder, Mark Zuckerberg, inadvertently admitted on Joe Rogans podcast that the FBI had come to them with more than a wink and nudge, suggesting that the story was actually Russian disinformation. Making matters worse, the FBI obviously knew at that point that the laptop story was true given they had been in possession of the hard drive for ever a year.
Why was the FBI going to Facebook (and presumably, other social media companies) to knock down a negative story about Joe Biden and his son? The only logical answer given what we know is that they were trying to influence the election. Mission accomplished, I suppose.
The lawsuit doesnt stop with Chan, though. Figures working for the NIH, the CDC, and other government agencies are also being targeted. Thats because, for years, they have obviously worked with social media companies to push the administrations chosen narratives. The censorship of the COVID-19 lab leak theory has been one of the more high-profile examples, but hardly the only one.
For all the talk of threats to democracy, Id suggest its a pretty big threat to our electoral system to have the federal government violating rights by proxy in order to benefit partisan goals. It also happens to probably be illegal. What the Biden administration did and likely continues to do is anti-American tripe, attempting to put their fingers on the scale even in the face of truthful information.
Lastly, can we talk about how abusive it is to even try to shield Chan from being deposed under the guise of national security? Im pretty sure the FBI lying to harm its political opponents (which conservatives clearly are) isnt an issue of national security. Its an issue of corruption, and the fact that the Biden administration might end up with egg on its face (and possibly legal sanctions) isnt an excuse to hide the facts from the public any longer.
Trending on Redstate Video
The rest is here:
FBI and White House Slapped Down By Judge in Major Censorship Case