The question was whether the court had the power of judicial review and under what circumstances wou- would it be exercised.Īnd since. You know, as, as, as visitors to the Constitution Center can, can learn that, you know, when the Supreme Court decided Marbury versus Madison the actual decision itself about a commission for a judge was really not the most important issue.
Nate Persily: Well, I think that the decision is important in its own right, but it's also important in delineating the responsibilities and powers of the board and its relationship to Facebook. Jeffrey Rosen: Nate, you have called this decision, the Marbury versus Madison of online free speech law. Nate, it is wonderful to have you joining us. He has written extensively on the law of democracy, the First Amendment and online free speech. McClatchy Professor of Law at Stanford Law School and the co-director of the Stanford Program on Democracy and the Internet. Jeffrey Rosen: And Nate Persily is the James B. Kate, it is wonderful to have you back on the show. She spent a year embedded with Facebook's Oversight Board, as it was being developed, and subsequently has written articles about it in the Yale Law Journal and the New Yorker. Kate Klonick is assistant professor of law at St. Here to explain this pathbreaking decision and its potential impact on the future of free speech online are two of America's leading experts on online free speech, and on the Facebook Oversight Board. The Facebook Oversight Board has just upheld the banning of President Trump from Facebook, but the board found that Facebook's indefinite suspension of President Trump was inappropriate and said that Facebook now has six months to review the standards for the ban.
The National Constitution Center is a nonpartisan, nonprofit, chartered by Congress to increase awareness and understanding of the constitution among the American people. And welcome to We the People, a weekly show of constitutional debate. Jeffrey Rosen: I'm Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center. This transcript may not be in its final form, accuracy may vary, and it may be updated or revised in the future. Please subscribe to We the Peopleand L ive at the National Constitution Center on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, or your favorite podcast app. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at Ĭontinue today’s conversation on Facebook and Twitter using up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. This show was produced by Jackie McDermott and engineered by Greg Scheckler and David Stotz. Research was provided by Alexandra "Mac" Taylor, Anna Salvatore, and Lana Ulrich. The Facebook Oversight Board decision on the January 7 ban of President Trump AKA " Case decision 2021-001-FB-FBR".He has written extensively on the law of democracy, the First Amendment, and more. She spent a year embedded with the Facebook Oversight Board as it was being developed, and subsequently wrote articles in the Yale Law Journal and The New Yorker. Kate Klonickis Assistant Professor of Law at St. John’s Law School who spent a year embedded with the Oversight Board as it was being developed, and Nate Persily, professor of law at Stanford Law School and co-director of the Stanford Program on Democracy and the Internet. The board also requested that Facebook clarify its policies on political leaders, do some additional fact-finding, and report back with more on its decision and rationale in six months-when the board will reconsider the ban. Host Jeffrey Rosen considered the impact of the decision for the future of digital speech with two experts who have done pathbreaking work on the Facebook Oversight Board: Kate Klonick, assistant professor of law at St. The Facebook Oversight Board-a recently-developed court of sorts that independently reviews Facebook’s decisions and policies-issued a major ruling this week, upholding the company’s initial decision to ban President Trump indefinitely, but calling on the company to come to a final decision on its suspension of Trump and similar cases with greater detail.
0 kommentar(er)
