[EL] Twitter EO

[Ilya Shapiro]

As with Citizens United, Twitter’s corporate form is neither here nor there as regards a discussion of its constitutional speech rights.

Ilya Shapiro
Director
Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies
Cato Institute
1000 Massachusetts Ave. NW
Washington, DC  20001
tel. (202) 218-4600
cel. (202) 577-1134
ishapiro at cato.org<mailto:ishapiro at cato.org>
Bio/clips: https://www.cato.org/people/ilya-shapiro
Twitter: www.twitter.com/ishapiro<http://www.twitter.com/ishapiro>
SSRN: http://ssrn.com/author=1382023

Cato Supreme Court Review:  http://www.cato.org/supreme-court-review

Watch our 18th Annual Constitution Day Conference, Sept. 17, 2019:
https://www.cato.org/events/18th-annual-constitution-day

From: Law-election <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> On Behalf Of Nate Persily
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 1:55 PM
To: Sean Parnell <sean at impactpolicymanagement.com>
Cc: Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu>
Subject: Re: [EL] Twitter EO

Apologies for being obtuse:
  My point about Citizens United was that if you believe that corporations have an unfettered constitutional right to spend unlimited amounts on campaign advertising, I would think that right would also extend to publicizing factchecks about politicians, as well, without running the risk of legal sanction.

----------------

Nate Persily

James B. McClatchy Professor of Law
Stanford Law School
559 Nathan Abbott Way
Stanford, CA 94305-8610
(917) 570-3223
npersily at stanford.edu<mailto:npersily at stanford.edu>

www.persily.com<http://www.persily.com>


On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 6:14 AM Sean Parnell <sean at impactpolicymanagement.com<mailto:sean at impactpolicymanagement.com>> wrote:
Not entirely sure why the views of defenders of Citizens United are sought, but here goes (with the acknowledgement that, not possessing a law degree, my views should probably not be mistaken as quality legal analysis): it’s stupid. The one redeeming quality I find in the EO is that it is not nearly so badly/incoherently written as the EO from a few years back “repealing” the so-called Johnson Amendment, so props for that.

Sean Parnell

From: Law-election <law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>> On Behalf Of Nate Persily
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 12:38 AM
To: Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>>
Cc: Election Law Listserv <law-election at uci.edu<mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>
Subject: [EL] Twitter EO

Attached is the draft of the Executive Order regarding removal of CDA 230 liability for Twitter and other internet platforms as well as encouragement of investigations of the Silicon Valley platforms.  Gotta say, this is truly breathtaking.   Eager to hear reactions from defenders of Citizens United on this.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200528/0c89a492/attachment.html>