• pjhenry1216@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Government has curtailed free speech only when the burden is justified by it’s benefit. Here they’re saying it fails, not because they’re prescribing a specific method but because it’s curtailing free speech beyond what is beneficial to the payout. It’s high burden, but low effectiveness in its states goal. Hence why they’re saying it’s being used to curtail speech they simply don’t like.

    Edit: and no, a database being kept fails scrutiny as it doesn’t serve the stated benefit.

    • orclev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hmm, it’s an interesting argument and it might work, but I still think it’s a far weaker argument than the one against the warning label. In either case this will be an interesting one to watch and I suspect because of the multiple issues with the law PornHub will ultimately prevail. Maybe not in the initial case, but certainly on appeal.