Dave Kranzler explains how a proposed internet censorship bill in California will do a way with the 1st, 5th and 14th Amendments. Here’s the details…
First, does California State Senator, Richard Pan, hate the United States? He is sponsoring a Bill in California that would effectively censor the internet. Not withstanding fact that this proposed legislation stands in violation of Amendments 1, 5 and 14 of the United States Constitution, if passed it would impose State-sponsored censorship of the citizens of California. Perhaps if Pan hates the United States and everything this country used to stand for, he should move back to the country of his ancestral origin where he might feel more comfortable.
Citizens in a democracy have a responsibility to stay informed and conduct their own fact-checking. Unfortunately, the majority of Americans have grown comfortable hearing headline sound-bytes on cable news media or seeing headlines in newspapers and assuming those are valid of evidence of fact. This is when freedoms and rights are in danger of removal.
Every mainstream media source in the U.S. recently has been required to retract news reports that were originally taken for granted as truth. I shudder to think to of the number of Americans who still believe Russia rigged Trump’s victory or Russia poisoned Skirpal or Assad is spraying his citizens with gas. All of these “facts” completely lack any shred of real evidence beyond propagandistic U.S. hear-say reports.
Furthermore, Pan’s Bill would establish State-sponsored “fact checkers” before anything could be posted on the internet. This one is curious. Why would anyone in this country trust the State? Who would fact-check the fact checkers? This part of the legislation would rip open a wide berth for State-sponsored tyranny. Again, if Pan feels more comfortable in this type of system, please go back from whence your family came.
The First Amendment is supposed to guarantee free speech. That means that anyone can say or write anything for public consumption. What if the assertion or statement is false? Liable and slander laws have been implemented as a check and balance. This falls under Constitutional Amendments 5 and 14, which guarantee “Due Process of Law.” Pan’s proposed legislation stands in direct violation of the Due Process Clause that is contained in two separate Constitutional Amendments. That reinforces the importance the Founding Fathers placed on the concept of “innocent until proven guilty.” And that Due Process is to occur in a Court of Law, not in some back office of a State Administration building.
I just finished reading “Red Notice,” which documents the horrors of State-enabled tyranny, terrorism and corruption in Russia. This is what happens in a country which does not have an overriding body of laws that are based on Rule of Law. Pan’s Bill, if passed, would circumvent the Rule of Law held sacred by the Framers of the Constitution.
If Trump wants to demonstrate that he wants to Make America Great Again, perhaps he should take actions to destroy Pan’s Bill and show Pan the door back to Pan’s land of native origin.
Constitutional Amendment 1: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances”
Constitutional Amendment 5: “No Person…be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;”
Constitutional Amendment 14 (this one specifically applies to Pan’s Bill): “… No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”