Sedition Acts in US History

3,742 Views | 42 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by Ghost of Andrew Eaton
BQ78
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:39p, 1/31/21
AG
So the first were the Adam's instigated Alien and Sedition Acts during the Quasi War with France. Any anti-government speech was unlawful. The act was universally rejected by the citizens and probably contributed to Adam's defeat in the 1800 election.

Lincoln famously suspended habeus corpus during the Civil War.

In 1917 Wilson lamented that Lincoln had not gone far enough and created a new Sedition Act similar to Adam's but one with more teeth in that even if the sedition was the truth, you still committed a crime. This was probably the scariest time in US History regarding sedition. Even the great legal mind Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote the opinion that Wilson's act was constitutional.

In our time we've seen the Patriot Act.

But today the trend is to move back to a Wilsonian mindset with the Capitol attack "outrage."

Have I missed anything of significance and are we about to enter a new dark period of sedition acts or am I being too pessimistic?
Reply Quote
3
AgBQ-00
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BQ78 • 3:47p, 1/31/21
AG
Don't think you are off track. We are in dangerous times for the republic
Communists aren't people. They are property of the state.
Reply Quote
2
FTACo88-FDT24dad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:59p, 1/31/21
AG
Never underestimate the ability of a statist to rely on the power of the state to implement his views.

And regarding the "great legal mind", Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr, have you ever read the case of Buck v Bell?
Reply Quote
4
BQ78
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FTACo88-FDT24dad • 4:19p, 1/31/21
AG
Yeah that's pretty sick but Holmes is one of the most quoted justices in legal history.

Doing some reading on Wilson's sedition laws and the parallels to today are very frightening. Wilson had a friend in the media Arthur Bullard that was only second to House in having Wilson's ear. He told Wilson the government had to insert itself into the psyche of America by allowing only its own voice to be heard by threatening dissenters with prison and shouting down everyone else. As to the government's voice Bullard wrote Wilson, "Truth and falsehood are arbitrary terms... There is nothing in experience to tell us that one is always preferable to the other... There are lifeless truths and vital lies... The force of an idea lies in its inspirational value.. It matters very little if it is true or false."

Sounds very familiar doesn't it?
Reply Quote
6
terata
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:10p, 1/31/21
AG
"am I being too pessimistic? "

BQ were drifting towards the old East Germany regime every passing day.
Reply Quote
8
Ghost of Andrew Eaton
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BQ78 • 1:23p, 2/1/21
BQ78 said:
So the first were the Adam's instigated Alien and Sedition Acts during the Quasi War with France. Any anti-government speech was unlawful. The act was universally rejected by the citizens and probably contributed to Adam's defeat in the 1800 election.

Lincoln famously suspended habeus corpus during the Civil War.

In 1917 Wilson lamented that Lincoln had not gone far enough and created a new Sedition Act similar to Adam's but one with more teeth in that even if the sedition was the truth, you still committed a crime. This was probably the scariest time in US History regarding sedition. Even the great legal mind Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote the opinion that Wilson's act was constitutional.

In our time we've seen the Patriot Act.

But today the trend is to move back to a Wilsonian mindset with the Capitol attack "outrage."

Have I missed anything of significance and are we about to enter a new dark period of sedition acts or am I being too pessimistic?
Maybe I've missed something but what has the government done lately to go after speech against the government?
If you say you hate the state of politics in this nation and you don't get involved in it, you obviously don't hate the state of politics in this nation.
Reply Quote
2
FTACo88-FDT24dad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BQ78 • 8:19p, 2/1/21
AG
BQ78 said:
Yeah that's pretty sick but Holmes is one of the most quoted justices in legal history.

Doing some reading on Wilson's sedition laws and the parallels to today are very frightening. Wilson had a friend in the media Arthur Bullard that was only second to House in having Wilson's ear. He told Wilson the government had to insert itself into the psyche of America by allowing only its own voice to be heard by threatening dissenters with prison and shouting down everyone else. As to the government's voice Bullard wrote Wilson, "Truth and falsehood are arbitrary terms... There is nothing in experience to tell us that one is always preferable to the other... There are lifeless truths and vital lies... The force of an idea lies in its inspirational value.. It matters very little if it is true or false."

Sounds very familiar doesn't it?


Indeed.

I wrote a 90 page paper on the jurisprudence of Holmes in law school as part of my American Constitutional Interpretation class as a 3L. Yes, Holmes was brilliant in many ways. He was also a Civil War veteran and his views were, not surprisingly, heavily influenced by his experience. IMHO, what you see in Holmes's jurisprudence is a brutal utilitarian realism. He was somewhat of a progressive on certain matters, particularly in connection with the First Amendment. But the realities of war left him far from a romantic when it came to the law.

Just my $0.02
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
BQ78
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 9:08p, 2/1/21
AG
Not much yet but the people who want to control speech just took over, so give them time. They have arrested one guy for posting memes so there is that. They are also monitoring right wing social media and harassing them as opposed to antifa and BLM.

But so far they don't have to do anything draconian, because their proxies in the MSM and social media are carrying the water for them.
Reply Quote
10
CanyonAg77
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BQ78 • 7:52a, 2/2/21
AG
Quote:
They have arrested one guy for posting memes so there is that
Link to that?
Reply Quote
1
AgBQ-00
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CanyonAg77 • 9:18a, 2/2/21
AG
Newsweek link

non MSM (nation and state) link
Communists aren't people. They are property of the state.
Reply Quote
CanyonAg77
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AgBQ-00 • 9:22a, 2/2/21
AG
AgBQ-00 said:
Newsweek link

non MSM (nation and state) link
Thanks.

Wow.
Reply Quote
AgBQ-00
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CanyonAg77 • 9:25a, 2/2/21
AG
Yeah it is pretty crazy. Kinda like a youtuber going to jail for the video that "caused" Benghazi. Or The IRS being sicced on Dinesh Disouza (sp?)
Communists aren't people. They are property of the state.
Reply Quote
4
Quad Dog
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BQ78 • 9:55a, 2/2/21
AG
I don't have much of a problem with that specific instance of arrest. If he was walking up and down a line of people waiting in line to vote handing out a pamphlet that says you can get out of line and text in your vote, that would be illegal and should be punished. I don't see how doing it in meme format to a lot of followers is much different.
Reply Quote
2
p_bubel
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:14a, 2/2/21
Quote:
I don't see how doing it in meme format to a lot of followers is much different.
It's very selective enforcement. That meme/joke/idea has been circulating around the webs since it's inception.
Reply Quote
2
AgBQ-00
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to p_bubel • 10:20a, 2/2/21
AG
p_bubel said:
Quote:
I don't see how doing it in meme format to a lot of followers is much different.
It's very selective enforcement. That meme/joke/idea has been circulating around the webs since it's inception.
Some form of that meme has been around probably since voting was a thing. i.e. reps vote on Tuesday, dems vote on Wednesday.
Communists aren't people. They are property of the state.
Reply Quote
CanyonAg77
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Quad Dog • 10:22a, 2/2/21
AG
Electioneering at a polling place is on a whole different level.

The First Amendment was put in place specifically to cover political speech, not porn or art, or other crap.

The intention is that you are free to say any damn fool thing you wish, when it comes to politics, and the government just has to smile and let you do it.

That anyone is stupid enough to believe you is not the government's concern.
Reply Quote
6
Ghost of Andrew Eaton
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CanyonAg77 • 10:57a, 2/2/21
CanyonAg77 said:
Electioneering at a polling place is on a whole different level.

The First Amendment was put in place specifically to cover political speech, not porn or art, or other crap.

The intention is that you are free to say any damn fool thing you wish, when it comes to politics, and the government just has to smile and let you do it.

That anyone is stupid enough to believe you is not the government's concern.
What political argument is the meme in question making?
If you say you hate the state of politics in this nation and you don't get involved in it, you obviously don't hate the state of politics in this nation.
Reply Quote
Quad Dog
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CanyonAg77 • 10:59a, 2/2/21
AG
Right, and I still see it as a internet version of electioneering. How it has been punished or enforced in the past doesn't have much bearing either on whether or not it is illegal. "But all the other kids are doing it" probably didn't work with your mom, and it doesn't work with the law either.
Reply Quote
1
BQ78
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 10:59a, 2/2/21
AG
That voters are stupid and gullible.
Reply Quote
2
Ghost of Andrew Eaton
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BQ78 • 11:06a, 2/2/21
BQ78 said:
That voters are stupid and gullible.
'The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.'-Winston Churchill

While I agree, that's not much of a political statement or argument. We'd arrest someone who was outside of a polling place telling people that voting had been cancelled at this location. This will be an interesting one for the courts to decide but I don't see this as a case to support the claims made above about sedition.
If you say you hate the state of politics in this nation and you don't get involved in it, you obviously don't hate the state of politics in this nation.
Reply Quote
2
CanyonAg77
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 1:04p, 2/2/21
AG
Quote:
What political argument is the meme in question making?
What political argument is made by Harry Reid lying about Mitt Romney's taxes? Adam Schiff lying about Russian Collusion? By comedians decapitating the President in effigy?
Reply Quote
4
CanyonAg77
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Quad Dog • 1:06p, 2/2/21
AG
Quote:
Right, and I still see it as a internet version of electioneering.
Not unless they are doing it at the actual polls.

Not if you believe voters should have a minimum level of intelligence that allows them to use their computer to research actual voting times and places.
Reply Quote
1
Ghost of Andrew Eaton
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CanyonAg77 • 1:35p, 2/2/21
CanyonAg77 said:
Quote:
What political argument is the meme in question making?
What political argument is made by Harry Reid lying about Mitt Romney's taxes? Adam Schiff lying about Russian Collusion? By comedians decapitating the President in effigy?
I'm no lawyer but those don't interfere with a person's right to cast a vote. Again, I think this will be an interesting case for the courts to hash out.

With that being said, I don't see how this impacts the OP. It appears to me they are arresting him for interfering with the right to vote, not for speaking ill of or against the government.
If you say you hate the state of politics in this nation and you don't get involved in it, you obviously don't hate the state of politics in this nation.
Reply Quote
1 edit
CanyonAg77
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 1:44p, 2/2/21
AG
Telling a stupid person wrong information isn't interfering in their ability to vote, either.

If it did, ABC CBS NBC CNN would be out of business.
Reply Quote
10
1 edit
Ghost of Andrew Eaton
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CanyonAg77 • 1:58p, 2/2/21
CanyonAg77 said:
Telling a stupid person wrong information isn't interfering in their ability to vote, either.

If it did, ABC CBS NBC CNN would be out of business.


We'll see what the courts decide. Either way, it's not a good example of what the OP is hoping for.
If you say you hate the state of politics in this nation and you don't get involved in it, you obviously don't hate the state of politics in this nation.
Reply Quote
Quad Dog
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CanyonAg77 • 2:05p, 2/2/21
AG
Good point, then this will be an interesting case for the law.
If he hangs up a posters with misinformation near a polling place, that is electioneering. Even if he isn't near the polling place when the posters are read by other voters.
If he makes a post to social media with misinformation near a polling place, that is electioneering.
If he makes a post to social media with misinformation far from a polling place, that isn't electioneering?

Based on the letter of the law, a social media post away from the poles is probably not electioneering. But the spirit of the law, it probably is. Smarter people than me will figure this out.
Reply Quote
p_bubel
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:42p, 2/2/21
That interesting case is someone's life.

For rehashing a stupid meme.
Reply Quote
1
Ghost of Andrew Eaton
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to p_bubel • 2:58p, 2/2/21
p_bubel said:
That interesting case is someone's life.

For rehashing a stupid meme.
No doubt but that person made choices that could have been counter to the laws of the land. At the absolute very least, this person sounds like a real *******. Of course, they deserve the same rights as everyone else but there is a reasonable argument to be made that he broke the law.
If you say you hate the state of politics in this nation and you don't get involved in it, you obviously don't hate the state of politics in this nation.
Reply Quote
p_bubel
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:08p, 2/2/21
Spare me. There is absolutely nothing reasonable about this case.

We all know this wouldn't go down if the meme was aimed at Trump, because there are memes and YouTube videos of the same joke aimed at his voters. Stop pretending this has anything to do with the law.
Reply Quote
11
1 edit
Ghost of Andrew Eaton
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to p_bubel • 6:41p, 2/2/21
p_bubel said:
Spare me. There is absolutely nothing reasonable about this case.

We all know this wouldn't go down if the meme was aimed at Trump, because there are memes and YouTube videos of the same joke aimed at his voters. Stop pretending this has anything to do with the law.


Do you happen to have any of those memes to share?
If you say you hate the state of politics in this nation and you don't get involved in it, you obviously don't hate the state of politics in this nation.
Reply Quote
CanyonAg77
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 6:55p, 2/2/21
AG
He did nothing illegal.

I'm basing that on the assumption that all he did was post smart@$$ memes with misleading content.

If that's illegal, 99.99999% of the people on the Internet are breaking the law.

The only way I can agree it POSSIBLY could be illegal was if he tried to make it look like he was a government agency. Were one to post something misleading, and make it appear to be from, say, the Texas SecState, and put it on a web site purporting to be that agency, then I'll listen to the argument.

Simply being a jerk posting memes? Hell, that's CNN's business model, and they ain't in jail.
Reply Quote
4
Ghost of Andrew Eaton
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CanyonAg77 • 7:02p, 2/2/21
CanyonAg77 said:
He did nothing illegal.

I'm basing that on the assumption that all he did was post smart@$$ memes with misleading content.

If that's illegal, 99.99999% of the people on the Internet are breaking the law.

The only way I can agree it POSSIBLY could be illegal was if he tried to make it look like he was a government agency. Were one to post something misleading, and make it appear to be from, say, the Texas SecState, and put it on a web site purporting to be that agency, then I'll listen to the argument.

Simply being a jerk posting memes? Hell, that's CNN's business model, and they ain't in jail.


You could be correct.

Again, it has nothing to do with the OP.
If you say you hate the state of politics in this nation and you don't get involved in it, you obviously don't hate the state of politics in this nation.
Reply Quote
BQ78
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 7:25p, 2/2/21
AG
Absolutely is, persecuting someone exercising free speech is indeed an attack on the first amendment that I am concerned about.
Reply Quote
7
Ghost of Andrew Eaton
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BQ78 • 7:50p, 2/2/21
BQ78 said:
Absolutely is, persecuting someone exercising free speech is indeed an attack on the first amendment that I am concerned about.


It's apparently not a clear case of first amendment protection. Just like electioneering interference.
If you say you hate the state of politics in this nation and you don't get involved in it, you obviously don't hate the state of politics in this nation.
Reply Quote
BQ78
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ghost of Andrew Eaton • 8:19p, 2/2/21
AG
Disagree
Reply Quote
3
Page 1 of 2 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.