Try the political quiz

Supreme Court Supports Government Censorship Of Social Media Companies

While many of the Justices has concerns about the plaintiffs' case (see my tweets below: did Biden W…

 @ParrotStellaPatriot from Missouri  agreed…1yr1Y

She said this: "threatening circumstances FROM THE GOVERNMENT'S PERSPECTIVE".

It's an absurdity: she was actually saying that the government gets to decide when it feels threatened and then have the power to quash speech it doesn't like under those circumstances.

It doesn't get worse than that.

 @UniqueFalconDemocrat from Louisiana  disagreed…1yr1Y

No, that wasn't what she was arguing. She was arguing that the "threatening circumstance," her hypothetical being a danger to the society, not specifically the government. Her example was, as usual, endangering children. It's the same argument as the excuse to ban Trump or Alex Jones from social media via coercion by government actors. The defintion of going around the 1st amendement.

 @ParrotStellaPatriot from Missouri  agreed…1yr1Y

You are correct, but when government actors talk about threats to "society" that they need special powers to combat, you know it actually means threats to the government itself.

 @UniqueFalconDemocrat from Louisiana  disagreed…1yr1Y

Of course, or to be more inclusive, threats to the oligarchs and various corp donors who have bought the government. Her argument is bald-face ignorance about the purpose of the first amendment. Kind of embarrassing.