dChan
Anonymous ID: 630b25 Oct. 11, 2024, 2:15 p.m. No.21748349   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>8642 >>8686 >>8756 >>8815 >>8856 >>9014

>>21748326

>>21748340

>>21748336

Alien and Sedition Acts (1798)

Passed in preparation for an anticipated war with France, the Alien and Sedition Acts tightened restrictions on foreign-born Americans and limited speech critical of the government.

 

In 1798, the United States stood on the brink of war with France. The Federalist Party, which advocated for a strong central government, believed that Democratic-Republican criticism of Federalist policies was disloyal and feared that "aliens," or non-citizens, living in the United States would sympathize with the French during a war.

 

As a result, a Federalist-controlled Congress passed four laws, known collectively as the Alien and Sedition Acts. These laws raised the residency requirements for citizenship from 5 to 14 years, authorized the president to deport "aliens," and permitted their arrest, imprisonment, and deportation during wartime. The Sedition Act made it a crime for American citizens to "print, utter, or publish…any false, scandalous, and malicious writing" about the government.

 

The laws were directed against Democratic-Republicans, the party typically favored by new citizens. The only journalists prosecuted under the Sedition Act were editors of Democratic-Republican newspapers.

 

Sedition Act trials, along with the Senate's use of its contempt powers to suppress dissent, set off a firestorm of criticism against the Federalists and contributed to their defeat in the election of 1800, after which the acts were repealed or allowed to expire. The controversies surrounding them, however, provided for some of the first tests of the limits of freedom of speech and press.

Anonymous ID: 630b25 Oct. 11, 2024, 2:45 p.m. No.21748468   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>8503

AUS…

 

Senator Matt Canavan

@mattjcan

Total Victory for

@X

and for free speech.

https://x.com/mattjcan/status/1844828132936753645

 

Global Government Affairs

 

@GlobalAffairs

X welcomes the decision of the Australian eSafety Commissioner to concede that it should not have ordered X to block the video footage of the tragic attack on Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel.

 

After the attack, a number of X users posted video footage of the event. The Bishop himself thought the public should be allowed to see the footage. However, the eSafety Commissioner ordered X to block Australians from seeing the footage on X - even though it was available on some other platforms.

 

X objected but complied within Australia borders, pending a legal challenge by X. Unsatisfied, the eSafety Commissioner demanded that social media platforms censor the footage worldwide. While other social media companies did so, X fought in the Australian federal court. The court ruled in favour of X and rejected the eSafety Commissioner's global censorship demand.

 

Meanwhile, X filed a legal challenge arguing that the video footage should not be blocked even in Australia. Six months later, the eSafety Commissioner has conceded that X was correct all along and Australians have a right to see the footage.

 

It is regrettable the Commissioner used significant taxpayer resources for this legal battle when communities need more than ever to be allowed to see, decide and discuss what is true and important to them.

 

Whether in Australia or around the world, X will fight for your right to free speech.

https://x.com/GlobalAffairs/status/1844773969146028152