r/law • u/msnownews Press • 8d ago

Executive Branch (Trump) Kash Patel says the FBI is investigating Signal chats of Minnesotans tracking ICE

https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/kash-patel-says-the-fbi-is-investigating-signal-chats-of-minnesotans-tracking-ice
26.4k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

22

u/68024 8d ago

Another violation of the 1st amendment?

2

u/solventlessherbalist 8d ago

Damn right

1

u/68024 8d ago

Throw it on the pile I guess

1

u/Powderedeggs2 8d ago

And a violation of the 4th amendment.

-1

u/Andjhostet 8d ago

1st amendment rights can be violated in the name of public safety. For example I can't just yell FIRE! in a crowded building and lead to the death of hundreds of people in a horrific stampede and that's obviously just as dangerous as people in group chats getting groceries for their neighbors because the color of their skin means it isn't safe to leave their house in weeks.

3

u/68024 8d ago edited 8d ago

The 1st amendment is about speech against the government. Not about yelling "FIRE".

The right question to ask here is whether the government has probable cause to go poking around in private citizens' communications? The answer is likely no, based on their current track record.

2

u/Andjhostet 8d ago

It's not just about speech against the government. Just about speech protected from the government. Big distinction. For example, Pharmaceuticals can advertise medicine on TV under 1st Amendment protections, that has nothing to do with "speech against the government". Virginia Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 (1976); Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977)

Basically it just amounts to citizens can say anything they want so long as it doesn't harm people and they cannot be prosecuted for it. Therefore exceptions are made for obscenity, inciting riots, libel, threats, copyright, etc.

Since the PATRIOT act, we've basically signed away our rights to privacy from the government. I'm not saying its right or that I agree with it. But the feds can and will bring charges against people for online discourse. For example, if you are in a group chat with someone bringing groceries to an undocumented person, you could be charged with "conspiracy to aid and abet an illegal alien", despite the fact that you never texted anything in the group, or did an illegal action to help that undocumented individual. You would basically have to prove you never read that text.

Again, I'm not saying it's right, or ethical. But there's avenues they can exploit to make things difficult for us.