cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1997-12-19 - Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment

Header Data

From: Marc Rotenberg <rotenberg@epic.org>
To: Tim May <cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: a9edc417d8349bde90ee8d6fbada1fab5925920b35c3e4d35b4f3124314ac165
Message ID: <v03007800b0bf50ceed20@[207.172.112.244]>
Reply To: <v03007801b0bddf5a7151@[168.161.105.216]>
UTC Datetime: 1997-12-19 03:58:28 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 11:58:28 +0800

Raw message

From: Marc Rotenberg <rotenberg@epic.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 11:58:28 +0800
To: Tim May <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment
In-Reply-To: <v03007801b0bddf5a7151@[168.161.105.216]>
Message-ID: <v03007800b0bf50ceed20@[207.172.112.244]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



At 2:08 AM -0000 12/19/97, Tim May wrote:
>At 4:46 PM -0700 12/18/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>
>>   Keynote speaker Keen Umbehr told the audience that he lost his job,
>>   his community and even family and friends during his First Amendment
>>   battle with the county commission in Wabaunsee County, Kansas.
>>
>>   Umbehr, who had a contract to haul the county's trash, also wrote
>>   editorials for the local newspaper, often alleging violations of law
>>   and other misconduct by the county commission. "What I wrote was true,
>>   and I could back it up," Umbehr said. "I believed that my
>>   constitutional rights were live and real, waiting to be activated. I
>>   felt that writing articles and speaking out about the government not
>>   only was my right, it was my duty to speak the truth, regardless of
>>   the fact that my whole livelihood was based on that county contract."
>>
>>   The county terminated his contract in retaliation for his articles.
>>   Umbehr sued, and the case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
>>   In June 1996 the court upheld Umbehr's free-speech rights.
>
>This is part of why the First Amendment is being eroded constantly. It is
>seen as a _political_ issue.
>
>The role of the _county_ in hiring or not hiring Keen Umbehr is
>problematic, but not because of prior restraint issues.
>
>Were far, far, far fewer persons hired by the government, the issue would
>be much simpler.
>

Tim's analysis is nonsensical.

A government employee loses his job because of his political
views. He brings a lawsuit, alleging a violation of the First
Amendment, and eventually prevails in the Supreme Court.

A non-government employee who loses his job because of his
political views would have no cause of action because the
private employer is not bound by the First Amendment.

Therefore there should be far fewer government employees
to prevent further erosion of the First Amendment.

>Suppose RealBig Corporation fired Umbehr for his views. Would a First
>Amendment issue have arisen? Of course not. In a free society, RealBig is
>free to hire whom it wishes, and to refuse to hire niggers, homos,
>perverts, Jews, whatever. And to fire anyone who wrote opinions the
>managers at RealBig disliked.

Substitute "fascist society" for "free society" in the paragraph
above and the discussion begins to make some sense. Hell, it's even
historically accurate.

[This is probably the point at which we get those posts about
how there is more freedom in Singapore. Unless, of course,
you chew gum on the job.]

Marc.

Thread