Periodicals and Field Printing, Reports Submitted to ... 66:1- in Compliance with Section 11 of Public Act No. 314, 65th Congress

Periodicals and Field Printing, Reports Submitted to ... 66:1- in Compliance with Section 11 of Public Act No. 314, 65th Congress
Author :
Publisher :
Total Pages : 918
Release :
ISBN-10 : STANFORD:36105119522659
ISBN-13 :
Rating : 4/5 (59 Downloads)

Synopsis Periodicals and Field Printing, Reports Submitted to ... 66:1- in Compliance with Section 11 of Public Act No. 314, 65th Congress by : United States. Congress Printing Joint Committee

Catalogue of the Public Documents of the [the Fifty-third] Congress [to the 76th Congress] and of All Departments of the Government of the United States

Catalogue of the Public Documents of the [the Fifty-third] Congress [to the 76th Congress] and of All Departments of the Government of the United States
Author :
Publisher :
Total Pages : 2440
Release :
ISBN-10 : RUTGERS:39030018822561
ISBN-13 :
Rating : 4/5 (61 Downloads)

Synopsis Catalogue of the Public Documents of the [the Fifty-third] Congress [to the 76th Congress] and of All Departments of the Government of the United States by : United States. Superintendent of Documents

Congressional Record

Congressional Record
Author :
Publisher :
Total Pages : 1324
Release :
ISBN-10 : HARVARD:32044116493396
ISBN-13 :
Rating : 4/5 (96 Downloads)

Synopsis Congressional Record by : United States. Congress

Catalog of Government Publications in the Research Libraries

Catalog of Government Publications in the Research Libraries
Author :
Publisher :
Total Pages : 852
Release :
ISBN-10 : PSU:000057731223
ISBN-13 :
Rating : 4/5 (23 Downloads)

Synopsis Catalog of Government Publications in the Research Libraries by : New York Public Library. Economic and Public Affairs Division

Overview of the Privacy Act of 1974

Overview of the Privacy Act of 1974
Author :
Publisher :
Total Pages : 276
Release :
ISBN-10 : UOM:39015085907619
ISBN-13 :
Rating : 4/5 (19 Downloads)

Synopsis Overview of the Privacy Act of 1974 by : United States. Department of Justice. Privacy and Civil Liberties Office

The "Overview of the Privacy Act of 1974," prepared by the Department of Justice's Office of Privacy and Civil Liberties (OPCL), is a discussion of the Privacy Act's disclosure prohibition, its access and amendment provisions, and its agency recordkeeping requirements. Tracking the provisions of the Act itself, the Overview provides reference to, and legal analysis of, court decisions interpreting the Act's provisions.

Free Speech and the Regulation of Social Media Content

Free Speech and the Regulation of Social Media Content
Author :
Publisher : Independently Published
Total Pages : 50
Release :
ISBN-10 : 1092635157
ISBN-13 : 9781092635158
Rating : 4/5 (57 Downloads)

Synopsis Free Speech and the Regulation of Social Media Content by : Valerie C. Brannon

As the Supreme Court has recognized, social media sites like Facebook and Twitter have become important venues for users to exercise free speech rights protected under the First Amendment. Commentators and legislators, however, have questioned whether these social media platforms are living up to their reputation as digital public forums. Some have expressed concern that these sites are not doing enough to counter violent or false speech. At the same time, many argue that the platforms are unfairly banning and restricting access to potentially valuable speech. Currently, federal law does not offer much recourse for social media users who seek to challenge a social media provider's decision about whether and how to present a user's content. Lawsuits predicated on these sites' decisions to host or remove content have been largely unsuccessful, facing at least two significant barriers under existing federal law. First, while individuals have sometimes alleged that these companies violated their free speech rights by discriminating against users' content, courts have held that the First Amendment, which provides protection against state action, is not implicated by the actions of these private companies. Second, courts have concluded that many non-constitutional claims are barred by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. § 230, which provides immunity to providers of interactive computer services, including social media providers, both for certain decisions to host content created by others and for actions taken "voluntarily" and "in good faith" to restrict access to "objectionable" material. Some have argued that Congress should step in to regulate social media sites. Government action regulating internet content would constitute state action that may implicate the First Amendment. In particular, social media providers may argue that government regulations impermissibly infringe on the providers' own constitutional free speech rights. Legal commentators have argued that when social media platforms decide whether and how to post users' content, these publication decisions are themselves protected under the First Amendment. There are few court decisions evaluating whether a social media site, by virtue of publishing, organizing, or even editing protected speech, is itself exercising free speech rights. Consequently, commentators have largely analyzed the question of whether the First Amendment protects a social media site's publication decisions by analogy to other types of First Amendment cases. There are at least three possible frameworks for analyzing governmental restrictions on social media sites' ability to moderate user content. Which of these three frameworks applies will depend largely on the particular action being regulated. Under existing law, social media platforms may be more likely to receive First Amendment protection when they exercise more editorial discretion in presenting user-generated content, rather than if they neutrally transmit all such content. In addition, certain types of speech receive less protection under the First Amendment. Courts may be more likely to uphold regulations targeting certain disfavored categories of speech such as obscenity or speech inciting violence. Finally, if a law targets a social media site's conduct rather than speech, it may not trigger the protections of the First Amendment at all.