2 expanded posts ยท every known parent and child
>> Gov does have the right (in fact the duty) to regulate communications >> between citizens and non-citizens/sites in other lands >(not wishing to start a flamewar) Why do you think so ? "...provide for the common defense" "To regulate Commerce with foreign nations..." "...or in adhering to their enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." There are the bytes - try reading them in context. Warmly, Padgett
Padgett writes: > Gov does have the right (in fact the duty) to regulate communications > between citizens and non-citizens/sites in other lands [...and later...] > "...provide for the common defense" > "To regulate Commerce with foreign nations..." > "...or in adhering to their enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." > > There are the bytes - try reading them in context. Familiar phrases indeed. Now, it seems to me that the Commerce Clause and other Constitutional portions you cited could apply as well to communications between two U.S. citizens inside the U.S. as they do to the citizen-alien communications you mentioned. Yet if I read you correctly earlier, you don't think the USG has the right to regulate those communications. Why the distinction ? -Lewis "You're always disappointed, nothing seems to keep you high -- drive your bargains, push your papers, win your medals, fuck your strangers; don't it leave you on the empty side ?" (Joni Mitchell, 1972)