What First Amendment?

Once again we have the left trampling on our Constitutional rights.

From Breitbart by Ben Shapiro:

An amendment is moving through the Senate Judiciary Committee that would essentially allow the government to determine who is a journalist for purposes of legal protection of sources. For purposes of protecting a source, a “journalist” under law would be anyone who:

  • Works or worked for “an entity or service that disseminates news or information by means of newspaper; nonfiction book; wire service; news agency; news website, mobile application or other news or information service…news program; magazine or other periodical…or through television or radio broadcast…” These people would have to have the “primary intent to investigate events and procure material in order to disseminate to the public news or information.” Opinion journalists might not be covered.
  • Bloggers and citizen journalists – citizens who commit acts of journalists without working for such an outlet – would not be covered, unless it was determined that “at the inception of the process of gathering the news or information sought, had the primary intent to investigate issues or events and procure material in order to disseminate to the public news or information.” In other words, the government – the Department of Justice – would now determine whether primary intent was news distribution or political concerns.
  • Those explicitly excluded from protection include those “whose principal function, as demonstrated by the totality of such person or entity’s work, is to publish primary source documents that have been disclosed to such person or entity without authorization.” Glenn Greenwald, please contact your lawyer.

Who would decide who fell within these guidelines? A “judge of the United States” can “exercise discretion to avail the persons of the protections of this Act.” But in the first instance, the DOJ would have the discretion to determine whether a person is a “journalist” for purposes of the law. Instead of focusing on acts of journalism, the law would identify people by employment status.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) said that it should not matter to citizen journalists if new protections extended to a special class of journalists created by the government, since the First Amendment does not grant any right to protect sources in the first place. “When we’re discussing the issue of adding a privilege, the issue of taking away someone’s First Amendment rights just isn’t engaged….All we’re doing is adding privilege to existing First Amendment rights, so there is, logically, zero First Amendment threat out of this,” said Whitehouse, ignoring the fact that a massive institutional advantage would be handed to approved government outlets, thereby perverting the entire system of a free press.

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) launched into the proposed bill, which he said could “have the effect of excluding certain persons from enjoying the added First Amendment protections the bill would provide.” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) agreed, stating, “Essentially as I understand this amendment, it protects what I would characterize as the ‘corporate media.’…But it leaves out citizen bloggers….I don’t think any protection should treat citizen bloggers who are meeting the underlying test of being primarily engaged in gathering news to report it I don’t think they should be excluded because they don’t happen to work for a media corporation.” He continued:

“It strikes me that we are on dangerous territory if we are drawing distinctions that are treating some engaged in the process of reporting and journalism better than others. If we are advantaging those who happen to receive a paycheck from a corporate media entity over those who happen to be citizens….I for one would have deep troubles with legislation from Congress saying ‘we will grant special privileges if you happen to work for a corporate media interest’….It seems to me the First Amendment protects the activity, not the employment status of the person engaging in it.”

—oo—

It’s pretty obvious that the Left abhors bloggers.  Can’t have the truth get out now can we?

“Zero First Amendment threat out of this”… you can’t be serious Sen. Whitehouse.  A child could see it.  Clearly you haven’t read the Constitution.  What part of FREE SPEECH do you not understand?

This is VERY dangerous territory that the Senate is treading on and is clearly unconstitutional.  Kudos to Sen. Mike Lee for taking a stand.  Where are the rest?

~ Hardnox

About Hardnox

Constitutional Conservative that Lefties love to hate.
Tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to What First Amendment?

  1. Kathy says:

    I’m glad you posted this, Hardnox. When I saw the story, my first thought was that our petty little president wants this legislation so he can go after all the bloggers, etc that are saying bad things about him. Since they didn’t give him control of the internet, this is the next best thing.

    He’s more concerned about hammering down our rights than he is about what’s going on in the rest of the world. At some point, the biggest fight he’s ever seen is going to be in his own back yard.

  2. Clyde says:

    YAAAWWNNN. Roll over, go back to sleep, there’s nothing to see here. Just the communistic bastards of the loony left, deciding what’s GOOD for us. And, of course, NOTHING from the limpdick “corporate media” about this. Good post, Nox. Now, for that damned meteor strike………

  3. Seems to me the “Corporate Media” is all in favor, as they are the beneficiaries of the loss of journalistic competition. And to squelch ANY revelations that the “Emperor Is Naked”.

    Darkness cannot abide the Light of TRUTH, and lives by the inherent contradictions of Falsehoods, Deceit and Lies. What is going to happen, when the dam of the reservoir of Lies and Deceit bursts, and all the Light busts the hell out of the NGO’s and the various levels of dictatorships and such worldwide? NOT just in America, but all across the Earth? We do indeed, live in interesting times.

    There are a few Watchmen awake. Listen~!

  4. Brittius says:

    Interesting. It leaves one with the conclusion that a “legitimate” politician, should work to make the government better, to answer the needs of the People, rather than work to usurp and destroy the United States Constitution, because that would only indicate, a Traitor!

  5. Buck says:

    Why is everyone crying about this? They’ve already decided THEY will decide who gets to exercise their Second Amendment rights and who doesn’t.
    And don’t believe for one second they don’t have the final say as things stand now.

    • Hardnox says:

      Good point Buck. All the more reason for alternative news. It ain’t over until it’s over. A reckoning is in order. Our rights are being shredded faster than we can complain about it.

  6. Terry says:

    I would think the leftist MSM should be VERY concerned about this, as there are no real “journalists” employed by them.

  7. Nee says:

    Well, If this makes you mad ‘Knox, how about in upper NY? HUD is now ingratiating itself into telling people where they should live to prove they can diversify neighborhoods!! I kid you not.