Today in Supreme Court History: January 3, 1911

1/3/1911: Justice Willis Van Devanter takes oath.

Justice Willis Van Devanter

Comments

[Holden C]

Eugene Volokh, working hard and tirelessly to protect the rights of online pervs, harassers, stalkers, and criminals to continue their craft and screw innocent victims.

[wolfefan]

Hi Mr. Caulfield. Of all the post that have been posted thus far today, why did you pick the only one that is NOT Eugene's to rant on? Are you suggesting that Josh is Eugene's occasional nom de plume or something?

[Michael P]

Oh, he's been ranting on other posts today. He's just incontinent.

[Holden C]

Americans pay some of the highest taxes in the world, yet we can't even get laws to protect us from online harms like doxing, cyberstalking, and cyberharassment. Nobody cares about "Free Speech" nostrums like "free market", "public good", etc... when people's actual lives are being destroyed by malicious online stalkers who go scotch free thanks to an irresponsibly expansive definition of "First Amendment."

Why does America bother to have laws in the first place? Just make all crimes legal under the "First Amendment" as "freedom of expression." The country and lawmakers are absolutely dysfunction, arguing endlessly over stupid shit like racism, partisanship, abortion, and other stupid useless crap when real matters like online safety, data privacy, online crimes are not being addressed, thanks in no small part due to people like Eugene Volokh who harbor ulterior motives (earns money from Google and Big Tech).

[Holden C]

For Volokh, establishing some basic guidelines to protect Americans online is a difficult, if not impossible, task. All society asks for is some baseline regulations to internet content that keeps people free from harm, like targeted harassment of private, non-public individuals, and protection from mentally-ill psychopaths who have nothing better to do than to ruin someone. Yet for Volokh, grasping this reality is difficult, if not impossible (although it could also be argued that he purposely ignores it because he takes money from Big Tech / Google).

As shown in countries that have already passed stringent cyberbullying laws, like the EU (including the Right to be Forgotten, a wonderful piece of court ruling that respects human privacy), internet regulation is not inconsistent with free speech and expression of ideas. If America were to outlaw doxing, cyberstalking, and cyberharassment today, the internet would do just fine, and legitimate free expression would continue to thrive, but illegal harmful harassing content would be curbed, making everyone safer. Yet Eugene can't see this. To Eugene, one person's rights do not stop at another person's nose. To Eugene, the rights of a mentally ill psychopath to ruin the lives of innocent victims is just too damn precious to sacrifice. The preposterousness of such an irresponsible belief is beyond words.

[David Nieporent]

The EU isn't a country. HTH.

[Holden C]

Given the ability currently for anyone, no matter how malicious, to say anything they want online and the power of Google to display all these remarks (no matter how malicious, true, or private) at the press of a button when someone’s name is searched, plus the reliance of employers on Googling subjects before making decisions, it is not an unreasonable ask to have some legislative checks and balances between unadulterated, untamed free speech and an individual’s right to privacy, because search results can drastically affect a person (and that person’s family’s) life. It is unfair for the web to basically allow anyone to post anything about anyone yet the affected individual cannot have it removed, while this will continue to affect his life going forward. It is just basic human decency and fairness. Stalkers should not be able to hide behind “free speech” arguments knowing full well they intended to malicious ruin their victims’ lives. It’s absolute BS and shows that in America, Free Speech rights have been taken too far against the balance of individual privacy. The fact that so many other countries are already passing legislation curbing the misuse of Personal Data just shows how irresponsible some lawmakers, and some lawyers, like Eugene Volokh, are.

[Holden C]

I would like Eugene Volokh to respond to this and tell us why he has never taken into consideration the malicious of cyberstalkers and the impact to the lives of victims.

[Syd Henderson]

It would be more effective if you posted this to one of EUGENE VOLOKH's posts. Otherwise you come across as a crank.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Too late!