90 Miles From Tyranny

Tuesday, March 5, 2019

TRUTH Is The New Hate Speech...

Florida Lawmaker Introduces 'Stop Social Media Censorship Act' to Protect Free Speech Online

Florida bill SB 1722 would fine giant social media sites for censoring protected religious and political speech.

Florida State Senator Joe Gruters (R) has introduced a bill to protect free speech on social media and fine the biggest sites a minimum of $75,000 in statutory damages if they delete or censor a user's religious or political speech.

The law would only apply to social media sites with "more than 75 million subscribers" which are "open to the public" and from their inception have "not been specifically affiliated with any one religion or political party."

The bill also prohibits large social media sites from citing so-called "hate speech" as a justification for political and religious censorship and authorizes the Attorney General to "bring a civil cause of action ... on behalf of a social media website user who resides in this state and whose religious speech or political speech has been censored..."

The bill makes clear it would allow social media sites to censor "calls for immediate acts of violence," "obscene or pornographic" material, that which "entices criminal conduct" and that which "involves minors bullying minors."

Here's the full text of Sen. Gruters' bill, SB 1722:

1 A bill to be entitled

2 An act relating to social media websites; providing a

3 short title; defining terms; providing that the owner

4 or operator of a social media website is subject to a

5 private right of action by a social media website user

6 in this state under certain conditions; providing

7 damages; authorizing the award of reasonable attorney

8 fees and costs; prohibiting a social media website

9 from using hate speech as a defense; authorizing the

10 Attorney General to bring an action on behalf of a

11 social media website user; providing exceptions for

12 the deletion or censure of certain types of speech;

13 providing an effective date.

14

15 WHEREAS, this state has a compelling interest in holding

16 certain social media websites to higher standards for having

17 substantially created a digital public square, and

18 WHEREAS, this state has an interest in helping its citizens

19 enjoy their free exercise of rights in certain semi-public

20 forums commonly used for religious and political speech, NOW,

21 THEREFORE,

22

23 Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:

24

25 Section 1. This act may be cited as the “Stop Social Media

26 Censorship Act”.

27 Section 2. Social media website speech; cause of action;

28 penalties.—

29 (1) As used in this section, the term:

30 (a) “Algorithm” means a set of instructions designed to

31 perform a specific task.

32 (b) “Hate speech” means a phrase concerning content that an

33 individual finds offensive based on his or her personal moral

34 code.

35 (c) “Obscene” means that an average person, applying

36 contemporary community standards, would find that, taken as a

37 whole, the dominant theme of the material appeals to prurient

38 interests.

39 (d) “Political speech” means speech relating to the state,

40 government, body politic, or public administration as it relates

41 to governmental policymaking. The term includes speech by the

42 government or candidates for office and any discussion of social

43 issues. The term does not include speech concerning the

44 administration, law, or civil aspects of government.

45 (e) “Religious speech” means a set of unproven answers,

46 truth claims, faith-based assumptions, and naked assertions that

47 attempt to explain such greater questions as how the world was

48 created, what constitutes right and wrong actions by humans, and

49 what happens after death.

50 (f) “Social media website” means an Internet website or

51 application that enables users to communicate with each other by

52 posting information, comments, messages, or images and that

53 meets all of the following requirements:

54 1. Is open to the public;

55 2. Has more than 75 million subscribers; and

56 3. From its inception, has not been specifically affiliated

57 with any one religion or political party.

58 (2)(a) The owner or operator of a social media website who

59 contracts with a social media website user in this state is

60 subject to a private right of action by such user if the social

61 media website purposely:

62 1. Deletes or censors the user’s religious speech or

63 political speech; or

64 2. Uses an algorithm to disfavor or censure the user’s

65 religious speech or political speech.

66 (b) A social media website user may be awarded all of the

67 following damages under this section:

68 1. A minimum of $75,000 in statutory damages per purposeful

69 deletion or censoring of the social media website user’s speech.

70 2. Actual damages.

71 3. If aggravating factors are present, punitive damages.

72 4. Other forms of equitable relief.

73 (c) The prevailing party in a cause of action under this

74 section may be awarded costs and reasonable attorney fees.

75 (d) A social media website that restores from deletion or

76 removes the censoring of a social media website user’s speech in

77 a reasonable amount of time may use that fact to mitigate any

78 damages.

79 (3) A social media website may not use the social media

80 website user’s alleged hate speech as a basis for justification

81 or defense of the social media website’s actions at trial.

82 (4) The Attorney General may also bring a civil cause of

83 action under this section on behalf of a social media website

84 user who resides in this state and whose religious speech or

85 political speech has been censored by a social media website.

86 (5) This section does not apply to any of the following:

87 (a) A social media website that deletes or censors a social

88 media website user’s speech or that uses an algorithm to

89 disfavor or censure speech that:

90 1. Calls for immediate acts of violence;

91 2. Is obscene or pornographic in nature;

92 3. Is the result of operational error;

93 4. Is the result of a court order;

94 5. Comes from an inauthentic source or involves false

95 impersonation;

96 6. Entices criminal conduct; or

97 7. Involves minors bullying minors.

98 (b) A social media website user’s censoring of another

99 social media website user’s speech.

100 (6) Only users who are 18 years of age or older have

101 standing to seek enforcement of this act.

102 Section 3. This act shall take effect July 1, 2019.

This is a superb bill which every Floridian needs to pressure their representatives to get behind and state lawmakers across the country need to introduce in...

#trumpquotes

We Are Born Free And We Will Stay Free...

"A National Embarrassment...'

What Is Immoral??

THIS."There Is No Global Anthem, No Global Currency, No..."
Hell Has Open Borders...

What Is Fair For American Families?
POTUS: It Is Time To Heal The Wounds That Have Divided Us...

Concealed Carry Is A Right...

"The Safety Of Our Citizens Must Always Come First"

We Will Never Surrender American Sovereignty To...

Confirmed: California is protecting over 5,000 illegal alien criminals by refusing to hand them over to ICE

Reiterating its proud status as a sanctuary state for criminals, California is back in the news for harboring and protecting illegal aliens that otherwise would be lawfully detained and deported – as they should be – by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Reports indicate that over the past 27 months, California has refused to honor a whopping 5,600 ICE detainers – these being the holds that ICE agents file to local jails and police to request the turnover of illegal aliens for arrest and deportation.

Of these 5,600 refused ICE detainers, more than 3,400 of them involved illegal aliens classified as “level 1” and “level 2” offenders, meaning these individuals were found guilty of committing serious crimes like kidnapping, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, fraud, illegal drug activity, and homicide.

About 250 of the ICE detainers that weren’t honored had been filed in both Napa and Sonoma Counties, two areas of California that already had so-called “sanctuary city” policies in place before California more recently issued its statewide sanctuary policy.

In speaking with Breitbart News Tonight during an exclusive interview that aired on SiriusXM’s “Patriot” channel, Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) Executive Director, Dale Wilcox, explained why sanctuary policies like this put law-abiding Americans, both in California and throughout the rest of the country, at serious risk.

“They’re dangerous policies that cost Americans lives,” he stated. “What will it take for these anti-borders politicians to wake up and put the safety and security of their citizens, their legal residents, before the interests of...

California Governor Jerry Brown To Allow HIV Positive People To Donate Blood

Media Buries Key Facts to Conceal Migrant Health Threat—TB, Hepatitis, HIV

California AIDS Rates Soar After Jerry Brown Legalized Willful HIV Spread

Trump puts socialism on trial for 2020 elections

President Trump has given notice that the lurch to socialism by the Democrats will be a key issue on which the Republicans will contest the 2020 elections.

Trump flagged his intentions during his State of the Union address on February 5 - when addressing the deteriorating situation in Venezuela:

“We stand with the Venezuelan people in their noble quest for freedom—and we condemn the brutality of the Maduro regime, whose socialist policies have turned that nation from being the wealthiest in South America into a state of abject poverty and despair.

Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country. America was founded on liberty and independence—not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free, and we will stay free.

Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.”

The Democrats’ enthusiastic embrace of a Resolution introduced on 7 February into the United States Congress by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) that “it is the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal “—confirmed - in Republican circles - the spectre of America eventually becoming a socialist country.

Now top White House economic advisor Larry Kudlow has ratcheted up this fear during a speechgiven at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on 28 February:

“I want you to put socialism on trial, I don’t want us to stand idly by. I don’t want to let this stuff fester. I want it challenged. I want it debated. I want it rebutted. And I want to convict socialism.”

The House Judiciary Committee, under its new Democratic leadership, on Monday issued 81 document requests as part of a multifaceted investigation into President Donald Trump.

The requests went to some familiar individuals and entities as the Democratic majority laid out a game plan for seeking to build a case of obstruction of justice, public corruption, and abuse of power by the president.

House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said Congress cannot simply wait for special counsel Robert Mueller or the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York to complete their investigations.

“We must protect and respect the work of special counsel Mueller, but we cannot rely on others to do the investigative work for us,” Nadler said in a statement.

Mueller is investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign, and whether the Trump campaign colluded in it. The Southern District of New York has investigated an alleged campaign finance violation.

“We have sent these document requests in order to begin building the public record,” Nadler added. “The special counsel’s office and the Southern District of New York are aware that we are taking these steps. We will act quickly to gather this information, assess the evidence, and follow the facts where they lead with full transparency with the American people.”

Even as some House Democrats have clamored for the president’s impeachment, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other Democratic leaders suggested it’s best to wait for the federal prosecutors to complete their work.

Monday’s moves are a sign that the committee that would initiate impeachment proceedings isn’t waiting on federal prosecutors to complete their work. Nadler, however, said nothing about impeachment in his announcement.

Among those who received document requests were American Media Inc. and its publisher David Pecker, who was allegedly involved in trying to cover up a story about an extramarital affair by Trump before he was president.

Former Trump White House officials Reince Priebus, Michael Flynn, Steve Bannon, and Don McGahn also received document requests, as did Trump campaign aides Carter Page and Corey Lewandowski.

Nadler’s committee also sent document requests to some of the president’s family members—sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, as well as his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. The committee also seeks documents from the Trump Organization and the Trump Foundation.

The president was dismissive of the investigation.

“I cooperate all the time with everybody … . You know the beautiful thing—no collusion. It’s all a hoax,” Trump told reporters during a White House event on...