We the People

  • Social media is detrimental because of misinformation

  • January 6th United States Capitol Attack created by President Trump

  • Russia’s interference with 2020 election using social media and proxy websites to skew voter’s opinions

  • Murthy v. Madison

  • Can also influence opinions about current issues: with personalized feeds, viewers will believe certain issues are still prevalent (i.e. gun violence, crime, other issues etc.)

  •  

Civil discourse and an informed public are crucial to a functioning democracy, as they enable citizens to engage in meaningful conversations, make sound decisions, and hold leaders accountable. Civil discourse encourages respectful, open communication, allowing diverse perspectives to coexist and fostering compromise and understanding. This is especially important in resolving conflicts and making policies that reflect a wide range of interests and values, promoting social cohesion and reducing polarization.

 

An informed public, on the other hand, is crucial because knowledgeable citizens are better equipped to critically assess information, vote intelligently, and contribute constructively to public debates. When people understand issues and facts, they can more effectively challenge misinformation, support ethical policies, and hold officials responsible for their actions. This mutual respect for facts and reasoned argument underpins the democratic process, ensuring it remains responsive to the true needs and concerns of society.

  • Hate speech should have some censorship, though we have the freedom of speech, many of our freedoms fade away once we hurt another person.

  • While the GOVERNMENT cannot censor ideas, there is nothing in the first amendment that prevents hurtful comments from being censored by the social media managers.

  • In addition, many social media platforms have report features that hides content such as this.

  • Hateful speech is unnecessary on platforms such as these, as it distracts from the point of the platform- to inform others. Therefore, platforms should keep the ability to remove these posts and comments.

Actually, many social media platforms have the power to restrict and remove posts that include disinformation, or are offensive. One example of this is Instagram. As one agrees to Instagram's terms and conditions, they agree to the platform's ability to remove any posts they may have that are spreading false information, are baseless claims, or are hurtful towards a mass group of people. While social media apps can restrict information on their platforms, Congress and state government does not have this power. But, as long as it is the platform itself, it is not a free speech violation.

There are many other rights that need to be ensured for all before this is put in place, but because of the Internet's indispensability and accelerating development in human progress, all people should have access to the internet.

  • It gives us all of our first amendment rights

  • "It wouldn’t do justice to what the Internet really does. It can’t be reduced to two or three rights, because it affects almost all of our rights. Internet access, like literacy which is a recognized human right, gives us as human beings access to a particular sphere of social reality, which in this case is cyberspace. It doesn’t just enable free speech, it’s its own domain" -Professor Dr. Merten Reglitz, of University of Birmingham

  • Is crucial for most, if not all, everyday actions in today's world. Ex: applying for jobs, ordering groceries, communicating with others, reading/watching news, completing work and school, entertainment

Net neutrality: the principle that all internet traffic should be treated equally, without favoring or blocking particular websites, services, or applications.

Broadband: the wide-bandwidth data transmission that exploits signals at a wide spread of frequencies or several different simultaneous frequencies, and is used in fast Internet access. Different from Wi-Fi, broadband is the actual connection one's internet provider gives to them.

 

This ensures that users have unrestricted access to information, and it prevents internet service providers (ISPs) from potentially discriminating against smaller companies or competitors.

 

The FCC’s decision to treat broadband as a public utility aligns with this principle by categorizing internet service as an essential service, like electricity or water. This approach helps maintain net neutrality because it enables the FCC to enforce rules that prevent curators from prioritizing or throttling specific content. Treating broadband as a utility also promotes more equitable access, especially for underserved communities, and may encourage competition among providers to improve service quality and affordability.

Social media companies already have the ability to restrict posts, so the US government doesn't need to.

Economic equity:

There is still much to be done to improve upon the wage gap observed by a variety of minorities. Though many Equal Pay laws have been passed, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay act of 2009, and Paycheck Fairness act, there is still a 16% average wage gap between men and women from all races.

  • LGBTQ+ Rights

    • Additionally, one minority group that has recently been affected is the LGBTQ+ community. 

    • This is seen in the case of Bostock v. Clayton County, where Gerald Bostock was fired from his company for his sexuality, which is a direct violation of Title Seven of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 

    • The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits against discrimination in the employment process based on sexuality or gender.

  • Yes, there are many setbacks faced by civil rights movements because of originalist interpretations of the constitution.

  • "All rights not explicitly stated are not given"

  • This may hurt minority groups, as the constitution never clearly states their rights, but in our modern day we clearly recognize their rights.

Slavery, poll taxes, Jim Crow laws, segregation, economic inequality, other voting discrimination and exclusion, violence and terror (KKK and lynching), educational segregation

 

Brown v. Board of Education, Ruby Bridges is 70 years old, very recent.

Civil Rights Act of 1964 guaranteed equal rights for all. Voting Rights acts, 14th Amendment.

Immigration laws:

States have each taken different stances and action on immigration enforcement, which has caused tension with the federal government. This has then further caused the federal government to restrict funding from states that do not comply with their authority.

I disagree, as this would likely cause conflict among athletes. One example of this is the recent suspension of Russia from the Olympic games because of the Ukraine conflict. As Russian athletes, they hold the responsibility of representing their country. For the United States to participate in international sports with countries such as Russia, it can be interpreted as encouragement towards these countries.

Yes.

Banning Russian athletes from international sporting events, as seen with Wimbledon’s 2022 decision, is a complex and controversial approach aimed at showing opposition to Russia’s actions in Ukraine. Supporters argue that this type of ban is a powerful symbolic stance against the invasion, signaling the global community’s rejection of aggression and pressuring Russia through social and cultural isolation. By barring Russian athletes, they argue, major organizations show that Russia’s actions have significant repercussions on the world stage beyond economic sanctions, however, contend that athletes should not be penalized for the actions of their government, particularly when many have little or no influence over national policy. They argue that sport should remain a neutral ground, focusing on unity rather than division, and that athletes who publicly oppose the invasion should not be punished. This approach may also lead to unintended consequences, fostering resentment and nationalism among those affected and politicizing sports in ways that stray from its original purpose of fostering global solidarity .

 

Ultimately, the effectiveness and fairness of such bans remain debated, with the answer depending on one’s views on the role of sports in geopolitics and individual accountability for national actions.

  • NBA Player Boycotts for Racial Justice (2020):

    • Following the police shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin, the Milwaukee Bucks boycotted a playoff game in protest. This led to a temporary pause across the NBA playoffs, with other sports leagues, including the WNBA, MLB, and MLS, following suit. As a result of the boycott, the NBA and players agreed on initiatives to support social justice causes, including establishing a social justice coalition and using NBA arenas as polling places in the 2020 U.S. election​

      .

  • Naomi Osaka’s Mask Protest at the US Open (2020):

    • Tennis star Naomi Osaka used each round of the 2020 US Open to honor victims of racial injustice, wearing masks with the names of Black Americans killed by police, such as Breonna Taylor and George Floyd. Her actions brought significant attention to the issue of police violence and racial inequality. Osaka’s protest was widely supported, and she became an influential figure in the conversation about racial justice in sports​
      .

  • Human Rights Protests at the Qatar 2022 World Cup:

    • Leading up to the 2022 FIFA World Cup, players and teams expressed concerns about Qatar’s human rights record, particularly regarding the treatment of migrant workers and the rights of LGBTQ+ people. The German team notably posed with their hands over their mouths before a game, symbolizing being silenced. These actions led to increased global scrutiny of Qatar's labor practices and contributed to labor reforms in the country, such as the removal of certain exploitative practices within its labor system​
      Iranian Athletes’ Support for Women’s Rights (2022)**:

    • After the death of Mahsa Amini, many Iranian athletes joined protests against government repression and in support of women’s rights. Some refused to sing the national anthem or made symbolic gestures in solidarity with protesters. These acts amplified global awareness of human rights issues in Iran, leading to widespread calls for greater support of free expression in sports and spotlighting the risks athletes face when advocating for human rights in restrictive environments protests highlight how athletes and teams have used their platforms to bring attention to important social issues, inspiring public discourse, and, in some cases, influencing policies or reforms within the sports world and beyond.

Athletes should not be censored for their actions for the American public. They should be celebrated, but be subject to the rules of the Olympic committee. If they are no longer allowed to compete, they should respect the decisions of the committee.

Usain Bolt's success and popularity in track and field drew global attention to Jamaica. His fame encouraged tourists to visit Jamaica, particularly around the town of Trelawny where he grew up, and helped build the country’s reputation as a hub for athletic excellence. Jamaica’s tourism and local businesses benefited from the “Usain Bolt effect,” with travelers interested in experiencing the culture that produced the world’s fastest man​

 Civil disobedience is always intentional, and always with the intention of bringing action and awareness. Breaking the law is not always intentional, it may be reckless.