Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-07-01 18:38:29 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: 477CA9FBBD7C32791D54E36911724C598E1E582FD030D7174A66E87FABAB0D1F
Participant Details
Original Note:
This is a decision about compelled speech treating artistic/written endeavors like a website in this case as a First Amendment issue. As such it is on strong ground, but the real problem is the case should never have been heard as it was a hypothetical, no actual customer. https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/article-3/21-the-requirement-of-a-real-interest.html
All Note Details