First Amendment
State Legislatures Threaten Right to Anonymous Speech
Anti-anonymity bills from the past few months might have good intentions, but they threaten the ability of people to communicate without providing their identities.
Jeff Kosseff is an associate professor in the United States Naval Academy’s Cyber Science Department. The views expressed here are only his and do not reflect the views of the Naval Academy, Department of Navy, Defense Department, or any other party.
Subscribe to this Lawfare contributor via RSS.
Anti-anonymity bills from the past few months might have good intentions, but they threaten the ability of people to communicate without providing their identities.
Section 702 is vital to national security. That’s why Congress must stop the FBI’s overreach.
The Supreme Court may overturn one of its most important free speech rulings of all time, but legislators and state courts can blunt the harms.
A review of Richard L. Hasen, “Cheap Speech: How Disinformation Poisons Our Politics—and How to Cure It” (Yale University Press, 2022).
Washington Governor Jay Inslee's support for a bill that “would outlaw attempts by candidates and elected officials to spread lies about free and fair elections when it has the likelihood to stoke violence” raises substantial First Amendment problems.
The Fourth Amendment government agency problem requires platforms to walk a fine—and sometimes untenable—line in searching for private user content that contains child sex abuse material and other illegal material.
As Congress decides whether to change the legal underpinnings of the internet, we need a better understanding of why it passed Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in the first place.