These guys win, and there will no longer be an internet.
Or newspapers or freedom of the press…
I’ve said this about Brett Kimberlin, who at one point convinced an addled judge to block Aaron Walker from writing about Kimberlin.
Couldn’t happen again, could it?
Instead, the judge issued a preliminary injunction that banned defendants “from posting any articles about the Plaintiff to The Blot for the duration of this action,” and that they “remove from TheBlot all the articles they have posted about or concerning Plaintiff.” The injunction by its terms lasts until trial, which could be many months away, and the plaintiffs asked that the injunction be made permanent after that trial.
This is not at all limited to false and defamatory factual accusations; it covers even constitutionally protected true statements, or constitutionally protected opinions. Under the injunction, the Blot can’t post anything faulting Brummer for seeking and getting this injunction. It can’t post anything saying that Brummer’s nomination was rightly withdrawn. If Brummer is renominated, it can’t post anything criticizing the nomination. It can’t post accurate statements about what Brummer did…
The details are at the link, and I have neither the time or inclination to wade in…except to say America does not work this way.
And we have a court ordering a publisher (however lacking in credibility the publisher might be) to just stop saying anything at all about this person: anything false, anything true, any expression of opinion, anything whatsoever. That is remarkable, and in my view unjustifiable.
UPDATE: I deleted a headline this afternoon, and then had to adjust a line of text.