David Greene's avatar

David Greene

@davidgreene.bsky.social

536 followers 60 following 463 posts

Civil Liberties Dir. @EFF, 1st Amdt prof @ USF, ex-SFSU. NOT any of the other David Greenes, like the ex-NPR host, the ex-UGA QB, or the 1 who directed Grease. Posts r mine only, so hands off.

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

It's true! Listen in as I, @daphnek.bsky.social and @mmasnick.bsky.social opine about the Netchoice, Murthy, and maybe even Lindke cases. There will even be Q&A!

0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes

Reposted by David Greene

Electronic Frontier Foundation's avatar Electronic Frontier Foundation @eff.org
[ View ]

LAST CHANCE:
Through EFF's 34th birthday on July 10, you can receive two rare gifts, be a member for just $20, and new recurring donations even get a free match! Join today: eff.org/summer

0 replies 3 reposts 7 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Not those parents rights! Florida school board now wants to depose a kid to confirm he wants to read a banned book because it's not enough that his mom wants him to have access to it, even tho the ban presupposes that kids have no right to make these decisions www.tallahassee.com/story/news/p...

0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Wherein I say "the NetChoice decision shows that platforms’ curation decisions are 'First Amendment protected speech, and it’s very, very difficult — if not impossible — for a state to regulate that process.'” www.theverge.com/24195235/sco...

0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

Reposted by David Greene

evacide's avatar evacide @evacide.bsky.social
[ View ]

I'm quoting this whole thread, but I mostly want to highlight David's point about how Alito (and, honestly, so many other people) doesn't see sex censorship as censorship.

1 replies 34 reposts 180 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

and still writing the COMPLETE ANALYSIS

1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

2nd, Alito like many others before him, ahistoricallly lionizes traditional news media making it seem like every newspaper decision is a carefully crafted professional choice rather than "Quick! Find me a wire service story that fits in this space!" Maybe they should spend a few days in a newsroom.

3 replies 4 reposts 60 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

He displays the common fallacy of only seeing censorship he disagrees with & not seeing it if when he too would have censored. He cites to Parler as doing little content moderation. But Parler has 14 categories of "prohibited content." Sex censorship never counts. parler.com/community-gu...

1 replies 4 reposts 64 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Some thoughts on Alito's concurrence in the Netchoice cases in which he disagrees with the 5+ other justices who wrote that social media platforms have 1st Amendment rights to curate user speech (& he also disagrees with ME). His opinion is poorly reasoned and ahistorical. But 2 special points:

1 replies 3 reposts 37 likes

Reposted by David Greene

Electronic Frontier Foundation's avatar Electronic Frontier Foundation @eff.org
[ View ]

EFF has said time and again that age verification mandates are surveillance systems which undermine anonymity and privacy of all, don’t work as intended, and chill access to speech online. (1/4)

3 replies 68 reposts 212 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

After choosing not to use Murthy v MO to clarify the line between permissible persuasion and impermissible coercion, the Supreme Court, unsurprisingly, denies cert in O'Handley v Weber, which would have presented that chance as well (though was also dodge-able on redressability as in Murthy)

0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

One way to break down the Netchoice decisions from SCOTUS today: 5 votes for "algorithms" being virtue-neutral 3 votes for "algorithms" being pernicious 1 vote for still thinking about it

0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

This is good: The court finds the age verification law not narrowly tailored to the state's interest in protecting children citing the existence of nonregulatory alternatives to assist parents, AND the fact that age verification schemes bruden adult internet use too.

0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

And, impressively, the court cites to the just-hours-before-issued Moody v Netchoice opinion to address any cocnerns about the facial challenge.

1 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Because reading the various Netchoice opinions was not enough, the SD Miss just preliminarily enjoined Mississippi's age verification law (it was due to take effect today)

1 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Barrett, concurring, might be previewing how she would rule in a different case that might be on the Court's docket next term:

0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

How does the Netchoice decision affect transparency mandates? You have to look at footnote 3 where the Court seems to imply(?) that Zauderer (the less demanding compelled speech standard applied to noncontroversial, factual commercial speech) applies. What do you think @ericgoldman.bsky.social ?

0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

The First Amendment analysis in the Netchocie decision is solid (once you look past the Court really hating facial challenges to even obviously bad laws). It confirms that laws that interfere with editorial decisions are void. But allows other laws that don't target the editorial process.

1 replies 1 reposts 1 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Let's take a moment fully savor this shout out to competition law as an alternative to editorial commandments when dealing with problem sof market power by large social media companies:

0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Netchoice TLDR on the First Amendment issues: Contenet moderation is curatorial speech governed by Miami Herald Co. v. Tornillo (and it is a good time to remind everyone that Mr. Tornillo, who was of Italian heritage pronounced the Ls) Hidden in a fn: Zauderer governs compelled explanations

1 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

Reposted by David Greene

Matthew Guariglia 's avatar Matthew Guariglia @mguariglia.bsky.social
[ View ]

This is VERY cool. CSPAN turned the interview I did about the history of government surveillance and turned it into a teachable lesson, with discussion questions, for their Tech Social Studies curricula.

0 replies 9 reposts 40 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Was at the game when they announced it.

1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Next up is Netchoice's challenge to Mississippi's age verification mandate which applies to websites more broadly without a harmful-to-minors-percentage-threshold. We filed an amicus brief in support of the preliminary injunction in that case: www.eff.org/deeplinks/20...

0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

The law fails strict scrutiny because it is underinclusive (kids can see sex on sites below the one-third threshold and otherwise easily circumvent the age-gate) and the law is not the least speech-restrictive way of addressing the problem since parents have filtering tools available.

1 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Indeed, as the court explains, the Act requires age-verification by an adult even if they are trying to get material that is perfectly appropriate for minors as long as the website as a whole passes the the one-third threshold.

1 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

This part is awesome - the court explains that these efforts to protect the kids burdens adults' ability to access constitutionally protected speech.

1 replies 0 reposts 2 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Court undertakes an overbreadth analysis because the law "burdens a significant amount of speech beyond the core purpose of the statute" and fingers-crossed that SCOTUS doesn't do something weird with overbreadth in deciding Netchoice Florida on Monday.

1 replies 0 reposts 2 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

TLDR: The court finds that age verification doesn't work to keep kids from seeing sex online and that the law is likely unconstitutional. The court rejects the 5th Cir's analysis in FSC v Paxton and finds the law must satisfy strict scrutiny--but cannot do so.

1 replies 1 reposts 2 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

The law, like Mississippi's, was to go into effect July 1. All sites with more than one-third content deemed "harmful to minors" would have to verify that visitors were over 17. by using a third-party age verification services (like maybe the described www.404media.co/id-verificat...)

1 replies 2 reposts 4 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

And think of the poor folks trying to get press coverage on that day's decision in Corner Post v Federal Reserve

0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Reposting this since now y'all have the whole weekend to noodle over the upcoming Netchoice opinions

0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

The cases left for SCOTUS to decide on Monday: Netchoice (x2) Trump immunity Corner Post v Fed Reserve (regarding when APA claims accrue)

0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Hey folks! We're going to get the Netchoice decisions on the same day as the Trump immunity! That will be ... fun.

0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

Clearly the Court did not understand that I promised Mike Netchoice would come out this week. Preparing my emergency petition now ....

0 replies 4 reposts 25 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

The TikTok ban is a prior restraint subject to the most exacting First Amendment scrutiny, even in the face of national security assertions. The US will be hard-pressed to justify this blunderbuss, ham-fisted approach, so says us and some fellow amici to the DC Cir.

www.eff.org/press/releas...

0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes

David Greene's avatar David Greene @davidgreene.bsky.social
[ View ]

This was a point @daphnek.bsky.social was understandably very concerned about! And Barrett's description of content moderation in Murthy is pretty good. So we have thankfully moved past the unfunny "we are the least qualified 9 people to try to understand how this works!" laugh line from last year.

1 replies 0 reposts 6 likes