Hacker News Reader

The first amendment doesn't have anything to say about the Internet, so it doesn't apply.

Think I'm joking? This is the stated judicial philosophy of the majority of Supreme Court justices. There is no traditional deeply rooted in American tradition that says anything about the Internet, either.

View on HN

> The first amendment doesn't have anything to say about the Internet, so it doesn't apply.

Moreover, when taking that mode of interpretation, it doesn't say anything about the States, nor does the 14th Amendment say anything about some of the rights protected against federal intrusion by the Bill of Rights.

I believe the process you’re talking about is called incorporation: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_the_Bill_of...

The Court will rely on this precedent where convenient, I suspect.

What I am talking about is that the particular mode of originalism that seems to have been adopted in Dobbs (and especially the extension specifically naming the broader doctrine of substantive due process as needing reconsideration in Thomas’ concurrence) is one which it is hard to see incorporation under the due process clause surviving if applied in any intellectually consistent, coherent manner.

Agreed. If it does stand, it will be in order to maintain ideological consistency, not judicial consistency. What a mess.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com