Hacker News Reader

Comment by SamuelAdams | Hacker News Reader

Page 4, line 8:

    (2) FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTION.—No person shall be held liable under this section for any activity protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.’’.

View on HN

This seems like a bit of CYA on the part of the drafters for the inevitable court challenge. "We did consider the constitutional issues, we promise!"

Without specifics, that line is meaningless.

edit: This speaks to a larger problem with how our representatives work these days. They're supposed to respect the limits placed on their power and they're supposed to guard the powers they are given jealously. Instead, they trip over each other to run away from their lawful authority, and when they finally decide to "do something", limits are dismissed with a wave of the hand.

But what activity does this act prohibit, that isn't "protected by the First Amendment"?

Libel is a crime and some states have defamation laws. It wouldn't be hard to tack this onto those and--if they really want to push it, which they will if given the chance--make it a sex crime to get that lifelong punishment.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com