SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on Tuesday temporarily blocked a congressional subpoena that seeks information on how the classified advertising website Backpage.com screens ads for possible sex trafficking.
The order came hours after Backpage CEO Carl Ferrer asked the high court to intervene, saying the case threatens the First Amendment rights of online publishers.
A federal appeals court ruled 2-1 on Friday that the website must respond to the subpoena within 10 days. Roberts said Backpage does not have to comply with the appeals court order until further action from the Supreme Court.
[...] The Senate panel has tried for nearly a year to force Backpage to produce certain documents as part of its investigation into human trafficking over the Internet.
After the website refused to comply, the Senate voted 96-0 in March to hold the website in contempt.
[...] While Backpage has produced over 16,000 pages of documents responding to the subpoena, Ferrer said documents relating to the website's system for reviewing ads are part of the editorial process protected under the First Amendment.
"This case presents a question of exceptional nationwide importance involving the protection the First Amendment provides to online publishers of third-party content when they engage in core editorial functions," Ferrer said in a brief filed to Roberts.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SUPREME_COURT_SEX_TRAFFICKING
(Score: 2) by tfried on Wednesday September 07 2016, @07:06PM
Ok, so I have no idea, what this is all about, and this does not spark my interest enough to read past the summary. But I always thought the First Amendment that was about the right to say something, not about the right to hold something secret (which is another important right, but clearly not the same). How can it be used / how is it being used against a subpoena seeking information?
(Score: 2, Informative) by arcz on Wednesday September 07 2016, @07:20PM
Last time I checked, the freedom was the "freedom of speech, and of the press" not "the freedom of speech and not the press".
Presumably, editing would fall under "press" and would be privileged.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 07 2016, @08:29PM
Is the press free to have its own editorial policies on which ads it will accept and which it will not?
Can congress critters meddle or even demand documents about the policies of a publication regarding its advertising?
If a publication is attracting ads for things that are and should be illegal, then use the publication as a way to find the advertisers. It is the actual advertisers doing the crime.
Sadly, police work is not always easy when you don't (yet) have a police state.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by Entropy on Wednesday September 07 2016, @09:49PM
Perhaps they are saying "You can find a hooker over there."