Mastodawn

The government says journalists and sources who are living in the United States illegally don’t have First Amendment rights.

But the First Amendment was written to limit government power, not let officials decide whose voices are worth hearing.

https://freedom.press/issues/no-first-amendment-for-some-immigrant-journalists-or-sources-govt-says/

No First Amendment for some immigrant journalists or sources, gov’t says

The administration’s argument in Estefany Rodríguez’s case that the First Amendment doesn’t apply to people in the U.S. who lack legal status could silence some reporters and sources

Freedom of the Press

Show thread

2rad0 Mar 24

@freedomofpress

On the bright side, there might finally be a crystal clear unambiguous ruling they pretend has to exist after this case. They sure do love wasting everyones time and money with chat GPT legal theories.

Show thread

LukefromDC Mar 25

@freedomofpress Again I can't call this a declaration of war, as the conflict is already underway. Anyone being set outside the First Amendment means it is 100% dead for everyone unless defended by physical force

Show thread

aismallard Mar 25

@freedomofpress @igd_news

Here’s another absurd twist on the government’s argument: The First Amendment also protects free exercise of religion. If those lacking legal status have no First Amendment rights, the government could forbid them from exercising their religion or require them to follow a particular religion.

disgusting…

Show thread

2xfo 2d ago

@freedomofpress
If I'm reading this right the government wants to restrict speech based on their own accusations, not any actual legal result - meaning they can silence anyone they want by claiming they violated immigration law

Show thread

2xfo 2d ago

@freedomofpress
If immigrants don't have the right to trial then no one does, because the moment they want you gone you will become an immigrant by accusation and there will be no way to challenge that