In view of the gravity of the core US liberty interests at stake in this case, I'll exercise MY first amendment rights -- and make it available to the public here -- even before the able judge rules that it may be filed.
Do enjoy all of it -- but here is a bit:
. . . .The actions taken by the White House and the Department of Commerce (together, the “Government’s actions”) in this case are so unnecessarily broad that they fail the First Amendment requirement to employ the least-restrictive means of achieving the competing government aims of national security. Today, according to media reports of Central Intelligence Agency findings, no data on American users of TikTok is stored in or been shared with China. The Administration has thus far provided no evidence to the contrary, nor has it provided evidence that China’s Communist Party or military have acquired data on TikTok’s users in the United States.
To the extent that the Administration may provide the court with classified information bearing on these questions that it cannot share with the public, that information must be of sufficient probity, weight, and certitude to warrant sweeping aside the significant First Amendment interests. Otherwise, the lack of evidence -- and the breadth of the proposed ban on a social media platform that would curtail access for nearly a quarter of the U.S. population -- leads to the conclusion that the Government’s actions fail to meet the requirement of narrow tailoring as set forth in applicable Supreme Court precedents.
The Government’s actions are unprecedented in scope. There is no previous example in U.S. history of a complete ban of a media platform that directly deprives a quarter of the U.S. population access to information on that platform. Neither is there any precedent for depriving so many Americans of their opportunity to express themselves on that medium. As outlined below, the needless breadth of the Government’s actions leaves open the opportunity to employ far less restrictive means to achieve its objectives. Because less-restrictive means are available to vindicate the Administration’s national security concerns, the Government’s actions should not be implemented as proposed. . . .
Onward. . . grinning ear to ear.
नमस्ते
2 comments:
Just filed, a press motion, to formally secure the dial in info, on the PACER docket for the case. [I got you covered, AP]:
"...Plaintiffs’ challenge to the legality of the government’s attempt to ban TikTok -- a popular mobile video app with a reported 100 million active users in the United States -- is a matter of intense public interest and concern. Journalists and news organizations reported extensively on President Donald J. Trump’s August 6, 2020 executive order “Addressing the Threat Posed by TikTok,” and have covered this lawsuit since it was filed on September 18, 2020. Members of the press — and the public — have a strong interest in listening, in real time, to the parties’ arguments, as well as any rulings issued or other actions taken by the Court at tomorrow’s Preliminary Injunction Hearing...."
I have the full dial in details, got them from the clerk in chambers, late yesterday -- if the court doesn't post it by 7 AM EDT tomorrow -- I will post it right here.
Namaste....
MINUTE ORDER:
The Court hereby UNSEALS the Telephone Preliminary Injunction Hearing scheduled for Sunday, 9/27/2020 at 9:30 AM. Public Dial-in number is (877) 873-8017 and access code is 8692421.
So Ordered by Judge Carl J. Nichols on 9/26/2020.
Post a Comment