• MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    24 hours ago

    His free speech was never infringed. He can say what he wants and not be prosecuted for it. Whether or not he has a job isn’t covered by the First Amendment.

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Despite being an “entertainment” show, satirical media is still media, and covered by the First. These shows still rely on that protection against lawsuits, and have been exhonerated with the same defence, Cobert in particular. If you could prove government interference in this case, I’d say there was a pretty good basis for a court case based on freedom of the press, which is the corollary of free speech.

      • Petter1@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        22 hours ago

        But then, you see who sits in the supreme court, for fucking lifetime.

        And of course the stupid pardon rule.

        And immunity of president making him above the law even tho nobody shall be above the law.

        And possibility to de-found stuff without a vote or a chance to do a referendum.

        And gerrymandering.

        And winner takes it all.

        And no absolute majority requirement.

        All this made this fuckup possible.

        Everyone loses except only a very small minority wins.

        Do something about it.