Re:Twitter refuses US order to disclose owner of anti-Trump ...
by baddox on Friday April 07, 2017 @06:31PM
(#14063990)
I really am quite aware of Schenck v. United States. Truly. I don't agree with that particular application of the phrase. However, the phrase still does describe what I believe is a genuine instance where speech ought to be infringed. Moreover, it is a common idiom for such instances regardless of its original application to criticism of conscription.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
There are no comments on this comment yet.