Free speech
Free speech is in trouble, folks. A recent PEW Research Center survey found that 65% of Americans support tech companies censoring speech online. In the same survey, 55% support the government censoring online speech. By this they mean that either tech companies or the government should filter online content and remove anything deemed “false information.” The issue, of course, is who decides what information is false. Should it be the same government-tech censorial confab that assured me that Russians planted the Hunter Biden laptop? Perhaps the same techno-state cabal that conveyed such accurate information during the pandemic? No, thank you. The answer to “misinformation” and “disinformation” is not restricted speech, it is free speech. It is not less speech, but more speech. Let the people speak, and I’ll decide for myself what is true.
More free speech
The U.S. House of Representatives Small Business Committee released a report this week finding that, “[T]he Federal government has funded, developed, and promoted entities that aim to demonetize news and information outlets because of their lawful speech…” The Committee was investigating the U.S. State Department, which under the Obama Administration had been tasked with countering foreign misinformation efforts. The Department created the Global Engagement Center to do this. They, of course, promptly turned those efforts against Americans, primarily censoring conservative speech. The report finds that the GEC “circumvented its strict international mandate” by funding private contractors with “domestic censorship capabilities.” No one really cares about the U.S. House Small Business Committee. Also, the report itself will face censorship from the mainstream media. So, not much will come of this except for some lawsuits. Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court is going to have put a stop to the government infringing on Americans’ free speech rights. You can read the report here.
Crime
In 2014, California voters approved Proposition 47, a measure that reduced many felonies to misdemeanors and legalized retail theft so long as the criminals shoplift less than $950 worth of merchandise. Predictably, legalizing shoplifting led to an explosion in retail theft, including flash-mob style thievery. Enough Californians have had enough of this nonsense that this November there will be a new proposition on the ballot, number 39. The California ballot proposition process requires that six hundred thousand voters sign a petition requesting the ballot measure. That threshold has been met. This year’s Proposition 39 ballot measure proposes to repeal the soft-on-crime penalty reductions of the 2014 Prop 47 initiative. California Governor, Gavin Newsome, and other California officials are against the repeal measure. They claim it will “take us back decades.” I don’t know about “decades,” but it would take California back to before the 2014 criminal justice reforms that started on the west coast and spread like a cancer across the country. Parochial Indiana even got in on the action. Let’s hope common sense prevails in California (I know). You can read more about the proposition here.
More crime
Supporters of California-style shoplifting policies claim that retail theft has actually decreased. They point to a reduced number of criminal filings for theft. Failing to prosecute crime does not mean crime isn’t happening, however. Although cases are not being filed, reports of shoplifting are significantly up in many places. For instance, there has been a 68% increase in reported retail theft in NYC. You can read about it here.
The city of Sacramento, California has taken a quixotic step recently to deal with pesky theft reporting that they prefer not to prosecute. The Sacramento city attorney sent a letter to the local Target advising them that they were reporting too many thefts, and that if they continued to do so, the city would sue them for being a nuisance. I’m not even kidding. You can read the local reporting on it here.
Other
I’m dispatching live this week from the Indiana Judicial Conference. I’m happy to report that there is no Tranquility Room this time. There is something called a Connections Room purported to be a place where people can relax and connect. I stepped in there yesterday. There were no coloring books, just some candy on tables. I’ll take it as a sign that we’re moving in a better direction.
As always, thank you Judex readers. Please share by clicking the button below.