ACLU/EPIC: First Amendment Pledge Campaign

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 14:04:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> To: fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu Subject: ACLU/EPIC: First Amendment Pledge Campaign ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 16:50:00 -0400 From: Dave Banisar <banisar@epic.org> To: press <info@epic.org> Subject: Press Release: First Amendment Pledge Campaign JOINT PRESS RELEASE: American Civil Liberties Union Electronic Privacy Information Center ACLU, EPIC Call on Congress and Clinton to "Take the First Amendment Pledge" FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, June 16, 1997 Contact: Emily Whitfield, ACLU Nat'l Office (212) 549-2566 emilyaclu@aol.com David Sobel, EPIC (202) 544-9240 sobel@epic.org NEW YORK -- As the nation awaits a Supreme Court decision on the future of free speech on the Internet, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Privacy Information Center today launched www.firstamendment.org, a website dedicated to upholding the First Amendment in cyberspace. The groups called on President Clinton and members of Congress to be among the first to "Take the First Amendment Pledge" and cease any further attempts to draft legislation to censor the Internet in the event the Supreme Court upholds a lower court decision striking down government regulation of the Internet as unconstitutional. "In our view there is no such thing as a 'Constitution-proof' law criminalizing so-called indecency in cyberspace," said Chris Hansen, ACLU Senior Staff Attorney and lead counsel in Reno v. ACLU. The launch of the website comes as Clinton Administration officials have begun publicly discussing a shift in policy on Internet regulation, saying that "industry self-regulation" -- not laws criminalizing certain Internet communications -- is the solution to shielding minors from online "indecency." Hansen added that if the Administration had indeed adopted such a policy, it is obligated to announce it to the Court before they rule in the case. "If the report in this morning's New York Times is indeed true, it would appear that the Clinton Administration is preparing to take the 'Pledge,'" Hansen said. Reno v. ACLU challenges censorship provisions of the Communications Decency Act aimed at protecting minors by criminalizing so-called "indecency" on the Internet. The ACLU, along with EPIC and 18 other plaintiffs, filed a challenge to the law the day it was enacted. A ruling on the case could come as soon as Thursday, June 19, the next scheduled day for release of Supreme Court decisions. "Attempts to censor the Net will not end with the Supreme Court decision ," said David Sobel, legal counsel for EPIC and co- counsel in Reno v. ACLU. "Proponents of Internet content regulation have already indicated their desire to take a 'second bite of the apple' if the Communications Decency Act is struck down." In anticipation of such new attempts at online censorship, visitors to www.firstamendment.org are invited to "Take the First Amendment Pledge," which reads: "I pledge to support free speech and free expression for all Americans and to urge Congress to uphold the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and pass no law abridging our freedom of speech." Online users can capture the "First Amendment Pledge" GIF (graphic image file) for placement on their own website. Other features planned for the site include an "action alert" that informs users of legislative threats to the First Amendment and allows them to instantly e-mail or fax their member of Congress, and an online "postcard" that can be e-mailed to friends, relatives and elected officials, urging them to "Take the Pledge." The ACLU is a nationwide, non-partisan organization dedicated to defending and preserving the Bill of Rights for all individuals through litigation, legislation and public education. The ACLU can be found online at www.aclu.org and through America Online at keyword: ACLU. EPIC is a non-profit, education and research organization based in Washington, D.C. EPIC examines civil liberties and privacy issues that arise in new electronic media. It maintains a website at www.epic.org. ..

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <Pine.GSO.3.95.970616140435.25992G-100000@well.com>, on 06/16/97 at 02:04 PM, Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> said:
JOINT PRESS RELEASE: American Civil Liberties Union Electronic Privacy Information Center
ACLU, EPIC Call on Congress and Clinton to "Take the First Amendment Pledge"
The sad thing is that we need them to do it a second time. They already made this pledge once before, it's called the oath of office. If the ingore it after the first time why should they honor it a second time? - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM6Wyuo9Co1n+aLhhAQHH3QP8CiBUvqJw8i2x1MbpLt9IkVVlYSgURT7g 8dfPqdB6UCfueWd5fVs/MxiAvoZlf07JyxCeC34z0LjofR2DTgNEQldOeiViwUm+ 446L4+FZJtQ2GwqkimS79vsvLTnlS0rf03jQAZAfvbxlz2SkfcbeeHFZU4Gs1+Rj A6o9tLQmaEU= =JUBs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In <Pine.GSO.3.95.970616140435.25992G-100000@well.com>, on 06/16/97 at 02:04 PM, Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> said:
JOINT PRESS RELEASE: American Civil Liberties Union Electronic Privacy Information Center
ACLU, EPIC Call on Congress and Clinton to "Take the First Amendment Pledge"
The sad thing is that we need them to do it a second time. They already made this pledge once before, it's called the oath of office.
If the ingore it after the first time why should they honor it a second time?
Bravo! Couldn't have said it better myself. What do they do with presidents who violate their oath of office? Would anyone notice? Jim Burnes

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <Pine.LNX.3.95.970616160646.10982A-100000@westsec.denver.ssds.com>, on 06/16/97 at 05:07 PM, Jim Burnes <jim.burnes@ssds.com> said:
On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In <Pine.GSO.3.95.970616140435.25992G-100000@well.com>, on 06/16/97 at 02:04 PM, Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> said:
JOINT PRESS RELEASE: American Civil Liberties Union Electronic Privacy Information Center
ACLU, EPIC Call on Congress and Clinton to "Take the First Amendment Pledge"
The sad thing is that we need them to do it a second time. They already made this pledge once before, it's called the oath of office.
If the ingore it after the first time why should they honor it a second time?
Bravo!
Couldn't have said it better myself. What do they do with presidents who violate their oath of office?
Would anyone notice?
IMHO I think that we need a trial, similar to the Nuremberg Trials after WWII, for the politicians in DC for "High Crimes Against the Constitution of the United States". It could even be hyped as a "jobs" program for DC, just think of all the gallows that would need to be built. <EG> - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM6W7MI9Co1n+aLhhAQGsUAP+LCnVELNsdPO/0cvycnK6KOBs/bMAZ5k5 pro6IqZd3bsPbPskcOxEXJme0LY3pxazWDN9VLJyaPiM79T7AdibmZc4568uzcrr AKaSWLH3L3DsdMRauvR5M669j+mjpDB4NKANOfrubtXsE9KFaAoUNQp/nSxhWHU/ +fmbyxzs79w= =Ays5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote:
IMHO I think that we need a trial, similar to the Nuremberg Trials after WWII, for the politicians in DC for "High Crimes Against the Constitution of the United States".
It could even be hyped as a "jobs" program for DC, just think of all the gallows that would need to be built. <EG>
It would certainly bring new meaning to the term "well hung politician". (And one I could live with...) alano@teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."

On Mon, 16 Jun 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote: [...]
IMHO I think that we need a trial, similar to the Nuremberg Trials after WWII, for the politicians in DC for "High Crimes Against the Constitution of the United States".
I don't think it would be a trial, more likly to be a House committee doing this. Infact we need to give this thing a name, well Crimes against the constitution is realy an un-american activity. I know we could call it the "House committee on UnAmerican Activities". Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep. Buy easter bilbies. Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay? ex-net.scum and prouud I'm sorry but I just don't consider 'because its yukky' a convinceing argument

At 2:38 PM -0700 6/16/97, William H. Geiger III wrote:
ACLU, EPIC Call on Congress and Clinton to "Take the First Amendment Pledge"
The sad thing is that we need them to do it a second time. They already made this pledge once before, it's called the oath of office.
If the ingore it after the first time why should they honor it a second time?
Indeed, it looks to be just press release jive. If they "take the pledge" on the First, why not the Second? And all the others? In any case, they can all take this "pledge" with a clear conscience--not that I expect many to respond to a PR stunt like this--and say "I do." After all, their arguments for things like the CDA are not based on overturning the First Amendment: what they will always claim is that the law is one of the many "exceptions" to the First Amendment. (There are many...I presume I don't have to make a list here, do I?) And will EPIC then withdraw its support of Pro-CODE, which says that certain forms of speech when used in furtherance of a crime, or to hide a crime, are criminal? Would EPIC support a law which said that Spanish is legal to speak or write in the U.S., unless it is used to further or hide a crime? How about Pig Latin? How about Rot13? How about whispering? How about RSA? So, EPIC, why don't _you_ take the First Amendment Pledge and then immediately withdraw all support for Pro-CODE so long as it contains this pernicious language criminalizing certain modes of speech? I didn't think so. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
participants (6)
-
? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}
-
Alan
-
Declan McCullagh
-
Jim Burnes
-
Tim May
-
William H. Geiger III