Free Speech Isn't Free: Court Barring Access To Brief About Free Speech

from the irony-is-free dept

One of the tenets behind the First Amendment and the concept of supporting free speech is the idea that you're protecting the right to speech that you don't like just as much as speech that you do like. That's why it's somewhat troubling to find out some of the details behind the First Amendment issues raised in a case, which involves the court sealing an amicus brief filed by the Institute for Justice and the Reason Foundation. It's not clear why the brief has been sealed, but, apparently, it's got something to do with the fact that the judge, who issued the order, didn't want people discussing the case -- a free speech case, remember -- publicly:
Liptak, who has seen part of the secret 10th Circuit order that keeps the amicus brief sealed, says one reason the appeals court gave for its decision is that allowing distribution of the brief would help I.J. and Reason publicly make their case that Reynolds is being persecuted for exercising her First Amendment rights. One of their goals, the Court said, "is clearly to discuss in public amici's agenda." Obviously, we can't have that.

It bears emphasizing that the I.J./Reason brief is based entirely on publicly available information. It does not divulge any confidential grand jury information, protection of which is the rationale for sealing the documents related to Reynolds' case. The only purpose served by sealing it is to make talking about the case harder.
Most of the other background surrounding the case makes the argument that the woman, who is upset about being silenced, is annoying and irritating. However, as the folks at Reason point out, that's hardly a crime.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    darryl, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 7:47am

    or 'ALL speech isn't FREE'..

    why dont you change the heading to a more correct one.

    something like.

    ALL Speech isn't free

    Why are you making the assumption that if you have 'free speech' then 'ALL speech therefore must be 'free'.

    By assuming that "all speech is free" therefore I have a right to access all that has been spoken, written or whatever. You are wrong !!!.

    Clearly, that is not the case, and its nieve at best to make the false claims that if you say something, it is therefore "free for all".

    In your world, there would be a major conflict between the 5th amendment and 'free speech'.

    If you can see that, great, but I have my doubts...

    Its also hard to see what you motive for wanting to pry into the busines of other people??

    Or trying to gain points off legal and privacy issues for copyright, patent and so on. Disregarding what the underlying point of the case is in the first place.

    Like your raging against ACTA, they dont include you in their talk, because they dont WANT your input. They have already received public input, and they need time THEMSELVES to work out the details.

    What would or could you have contributed ? Nothing constructive, all your suggestings were or are about how bad it is, and how they are not 'open' enough for you !!.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    icon
    PaulT (profile), Nov 10th, 2010 @ 7:58am

    Re: or 'ALL speech isn't FREE'..

    "they dont include you in their talk, because they dont WANT your input."

    You don't see a problem with them getting their own way with that?

    The jury's out, so to speak, on this particular case as we don't know the full reasons for sealing the brief as yet nor its contents. ACTA, on the other hand, is a clear case of corporate interests being followed while consumers and the public were openly blocked from even participating. A shame you thing that's something that's right in a democratic society, but not surprising coming from you.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    sam, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 8:04am

    oopen your eyes paulT the acta is coming unglued.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 8:12am

    Re: or 'ALL speech isn't FREE'..

    I don't understand the "major conflict between the 5th amendment and 'free speech'" part. Are you trying to say free speech would conflict with due process? Or double-jeopardy? Or self-incrimination? Or a jury of your peers? Or eminent domain?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Michial Thompson, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 8:17am

    Biggest flaw in "Free Speach" is...

    Everyone seems to hide behind free speach, but the bigges flaw is noone is held accountable for the crap that spews from the mouths of those who irresponsibly abuse the right.

    People like little mikee sit here and spew garbage encouraging piracy and IP theft etc, and yet is left free to spew the crap even as those who follow get fined or go to prison for believing his crap.

    little mikee's crimes may not be as bad as the racial hate groups, but it is no different.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 8:22am

    Re: Biggest flaw in "Free Speach" is...

    "Everyone seems to hide behind free speach, but the bigges flaw is noone is held accountable for the crap that spews from the mouths of those who irresponsibly abuse the right."

    The purpose of free speech is to allow people to say what they want without govt imposed punishments. Otherwise free speech exists everywhere, I am free to criticize the govt but they are free to kill me as a consequence.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    icon
    Qritiqal (profile), Nov 10th, 2010 @ 8:24am

    Wow

    The bed bugs sure came out on this one, Mike.

    Perhaps some of these naysayers can actually address your question of WHY this information would be sealed instead of using this occasion to spew their own "protected under the 1st amendment" drivel.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    bob, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 8:27am

    Tricky Dick, The DEA, and The War On Drugs

    This BS all goes back to the the Subject of this thread.
    So the Government gets in the way of Dr's treating patients.
    Wait until Obama Care goes into full force.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 8:29am

    Re: Biggest flaw in "Free Speach" is...

    The irony here is awesome. Thank you little michee.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 8:32am

    Without knowing what is in the brief, it is hard to determine if the brief should be sealed or not. Nice Catch 22 there. Some judge basically says "trust me."

    As it was filed as a friend of the court, maybe there was some personal information in the briefing that while should sway the ultimate case, doesn't really belong in the public domain.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 8:36am

    Re: Wow

    No kidding! I imagine that Lindley Murray is also whirling in his grave right about now.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 8:39am

    Who told you it was ever free? Are you deluded. Our government system in the US only benefits the ones who can afford it. It is run by Millionaires for Millionaires. Freedom is very costly. If you can afford it you can have it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    A Bedbug, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 8:45am

    Re: Wow

    Hey! Don't insult me like that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Mike Sabbatino, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 8:46am

    Freedom Isint Free

    I believe The movie Team America: World Police put it best:
    "Freedom costs a buck 'o five"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    icon
    TtfnJohn (profile), Nov 10th, 2010 @ 8:52am

    Re: or 'ALL speech isn't FREE'..

    Speaking of irritating and annoying.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    icon
    Free Capitalist (profile), Nov 10th, 2010 @ 9:07am

    Re: Biggest flaw in "Free Speach" is...

    And what is wrong with Fresh Spinach?

    Human's are not carnivores, they're omnivores, dude.

    Try to stay on topic, Big Michelle.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    Jason, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 9:28am

    Re: Re: Biggest flaw in "Free Speach" is...

    Ahhhhhhhh. That was good for me, you?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    Jason, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 9:41am

    Re: or 'ALL speech isn't FREE'..

    "Its also hard to see what you motive for wanting to pry into the busines of other people??" read the welcome, although otherwise unsolicited comment.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Jon Noowtun, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 9:48am

    Most of the other background surrounding the case makes the argument that the woman, who is upset about being silenced, is annoying and irritating.


    Well then she's obviously a troll or shill for some vested interest and they're doing the world a favor by silencing her. Just like I silence anyone who annoys or irritates me on my site.

    www.Pee2PeeNet.net

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    NAMELESS.ONE, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 10:09am

    and every corpse of the founding fathers just rolled over in there graves

    FREE SPEECH IS JUST THAT

    It is supposed ot be free, as in unhindered, unthorttled, uncapped , unmitigated, and prejudged.

    Further proof the USA is not a democracy, not a republic but a fascist police state

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    icon
    Chris Rhodes (profile), Nov 10th, 2010 @ 10:35am

    Update from Reason.com

    Not only is the judge sealing up documents in the case just so people can't talk about the case freely, but it appears that the attorney general is attempting to stifle free speech by filing frivolous grand jury subpoenas in an effort to shut the woman up.

    The Chilling Effect of Grand Jury Subpoenas (and Secrecy)
    On Monday the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Siobhan Reynolds' petition for Supreme Court review of the grand jury investigation triggered by her advocacy on behalf of a Kansas doctor and nurse accused of running a "pill mill." [...]

    In its brief, the Reporters Committee urges the Supreme Court to hear Reynolds' appeal so it can "reconcile conflicts among lower courts as to what standard of review applies to grand jury subpoenas that target expressive activities." It argues that "the government should not be able to frighten citizens into refraining from exercising their First Amendment rights of expression, advocacy and association by threatening them with compulsory process—at least not without first satisfying a heightened standard of scrutiny." The committee also wants the Court to "provide guidance as to what type of investigation qualifies as one conducted 'in good faith.'" It calls the case "a good example of those rare circumstances justifying court examination of prosecutorial discretion"
    The article also notes that the sealed document was uploaded to Scribd, but since I can't get there from my work computer, I am unable search for it and post a link. Perhaps some enterprising individual not behind a corporate blockade can dig it out for us.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    icon
    DanVan (profile), Nov 10th, 2010 @ 10:47am

    Sigh....another "free speech" person who incorrectly believes that this means that people can say whatever they want, whenever they want.....and it DOES NOT SAY THAT Read the damn Constitution before claiming that Freedom of Speech means people should be given complete freedom to read everything or say anything

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    identicon
    Any Mouse, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 10:48am

    Re: Biggest flaw in "Free Speach" is...

    And back with flawed arguments and outright lies. Name one instance where Mike has advocated or encouraged piracy or IP theft. This article has nothing to do with either, no does it have anything to do with not taking responsibility for what you say. Sorry, Michee, but you're still just a troll.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    Any Mouse, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 10:55am

    Re:

    We of course know that it does not say that word for word. What it does say is the government can't limit our speech. So, yes, it does say that we can say whatever the fuck we want. Show us were it says otherwise.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    icon
    Free Capitalist (profile), Nov 10th, 2010 @ 11:00am

    Re:

    Satire? Hard to tell.... might just be me.

    If not, can you offer your opinion in the context of the article and amicis being discussed?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    icon
    Chris Rhodes (profile), Nov 10th, 2010 @ 11:00am

    Re:

    Did you actually read anything about the case in question?

    1. A woman and her organization speak out against what they feel is the unfair prosecution of a doctor.
    2. The attorney general tries to have her gagged by the court to prevent her from speaking out.
    3. When that fails, the attorney general has them subpoenaed for all their records (not because she has evidence that they did anything criminal, but because they disagreed with her and she wants them to shut up).
    4. When they refuse and elevate the issue to a higher court, Reason/IJ submit an amicus brief on her behalf, detailing how the grand jury process is being used to stifle free speech in this case.
    5. The judge seals the Reason/IJ amicus brief, giving the reason that he's afraid that people might read it.

    How does the first amendment not apply here? It really doesn't get a whole lot more cut and dried than thism folks. If the first amendment doesn't protect your right to speak up in public about an issue of prosecutorial misconduct, or even talk about the act of talking about prosecutorial misconduct, then what does it protect?

    Think, then speak.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 11:01am

    This judge is in the wrong part of the Galaxy

    Based on the sealing decision of this judge, it sounds like he might be happier working for the Cardassian justice system, where everything is controlled by the state.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    icon
    Overcast (profile), Nov 10th, 2010 @ 11:13am

    Hardly a surprise in this Global Tyranny anymore.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    icon
    The Groove Tiger (profile), Nov 10th, 2010 @ 11:17am

    Re: or 'ALL speech isn't FREE'..

    Well, that comment was annoying and irritating. Can we ban you from free speech now?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    icon
    Free Capitalist (profile), Nov 10th, 2010 @ 11:20am

    Re: Re:

    Every time I read about a few amici, I think of "Amici's" pizzeria in the Bay Area where I used to live...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 12:00pm

    Re:

    Oh look, someone crying.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32.  
    identicon
    Jason, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 12:55pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    If "amici" bothers you, does that mean you prefer "briefs"? Not that it's any of my business.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  33.  
    icon
    Free Capitalist (profile), Nov 10th, 2010 @ 1:21pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Nice one! Brieves... I prefer brieves (my new term for combos)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  34.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Nov 10th, 2010 @ 7:33pm

    Free speech is only free for big corporations and rich people that can afford expensive political ads.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  35.  
    identicon
    Jose_X, Nov 11th, 2010 @ 6:14am

    Re: or 'ALL speech isn't FREE'..

    Darryl, but we are talking about legal matters submitted to a public court that affect the entire public and which is supposed to be made public unless there is some significant problem with it.

    It's very acceptable to question at this point in time why that piece has not been made public.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  36.  
    identicon
    Jose_X, Nov 11th, 2010 @ 6:16am

    Re: Re:

    Can't the author of the brief write a new paper that covers the same points and place that on the web?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  37.  
    identicon
    Gene Cavanaugh, Nov 11th, 2010 @ 9:37am

    First Amendment

    Here you are clearly right, and that judge should be set down hard.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  38.  
    icon
    Rambo919 (profile), Nov 12th, 2010 @ 12:57am

    Sheeple Syndrome

    “People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.”

    Soren Kierkegaard 1813-1855

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  39.  
    identicon
    No, Nov 18th, 2010 @ 7:57pm

    reason/institute for justice sealed amicus: http://www.scribd.com/doc/40381296/12603816004025

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This