Thanks to AoIR Exec for writing up the guidelines. I wanted to make one point about reference to the US Constitution because there have been a few posts regarding the First Amendment that I found a bit confusing. I'm referring to this section of the guidelines:
* While AoIR supports freedom of expression, it does not simply do so within the framework of the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment or other countries' legal frameworks. AoIR (and particularly air-l)
The US Constitution First Amendment states the following: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." (quoted from http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html ) The focus here is on: _Congress_ shall make no law - so it is the US _Government_ that will not limit freedom of speech. There is no comment here about organizations that are not affiliated with the US Government. In so far as AoIR is not a branch of the US Government, AoIR has every right to set limits on people's expression. Given that people do tend to misunderstand this sometimes, I understand why the Exec decided to include that bit in the guidelines. Nonetheless, I thought perhaps it was worth clarifying. Eszter http://www.eszter.com -- __________________________________________________________________ Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
Eszter wrote:
The focus here is on: _Congress_ shall make no law - so it is the US _Government_ that will >not limit freedom of speech. There is no comment here about organizations that are not affiliated with the US Government. In so far as AoIR is not a branch of the US Government, AoIR has every right to set limits on people's expression.
Actually, case law interprets the first amendment quite differently. Membership in AoIR, and possibly by extension to the email list, is recognized more broadly under what the Court calls the "right of expressive association", an interpretation of the first amendment which pretty much lets groups themselves determine who can and cannot meet with them (and what they can say). The Boy Scouts are allowed to discriminate against gay boys and men under this right because that goes against the organization's stated goals, although the Court held that the Jaycees had to admit women under this right because admitting women doesn't keep men from meeting. Under this interpretation of the first amendment, in both of these cases (and in AoIR) an association is fully within its rights of expressive association to exclude members or classes of members if they significantly interfere with our rights of expressive association (as I think many of us would say of Lachlan.) But, such an interpretation, as I understand the case law it would hinge on the interpretation of AoIR as public or private, and that's where it gets tricky. Were AoIR considered publicly supported in some way (servers housed at a public university? public university staff time contributing to its maintenance?) or if air-l were considered what the Court calls "a place of public accommodation" (is the Internet a public place?) then it might be trickier to exclude members in good standing just on the basis that they were jerks. Just because AoIR is not a government, though, doesn't mean that rights first amendment speech restrictions don't apply. If anybody knows how email lists have been understood within the legal definition of public accommodation, I'd love to know. Yours in legal procrastination, Gina Gina Neff Columbia University
participants (2)
-
eszterlists＠netscape.net -
Gina Neff