Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 18h

For that matter, the third scenario might also be problematic under Schenck because I might be held to a standard where because what I said was literally false. This is as silly as “give me a lawyer, dog” being taken literally, but such a thing has been before. That’s why Schenck was a bad decision.

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 18h

In the second scenario, assuming there were no fire, I could be held responsible under Schenck but not under Brandenburg because Schenck held it should based on the falsity of the statement, while Brandenburg would hold I had reason to believe my exclamation was true. So yes, intent matters.

1

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 18h

* I shouted “fire!” because I saw a small fire that was subsequently put out.

* I shouted “fire!” because someone I trust said there was a fire.

* I shouted “he’s on fire!” meaning that the lead actor was amazing, but it was misunderstood as someone else being literally on fire.

1

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 1d

I can think of at least three hypothetical scenarios where yelling “fire” in a theatre would still be free speech under Brandenburg, all based on a good-faith belief or a misunderstanding because “likely to result in imminent lawless action” still requires a lawless intent for the statement.

2 2

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 1d

The holding in Schenck was that speech that was *intended* to result in a crime and presents a *clear and present danger* is not protected by the First Amendment. Brandenburg altered that restriction on speech to only that which is likely to result in imminent lawless action.

1 2

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 1d

The original quote was from an opinion by Oliver Wendell Holmes on Schenck v. United States, which was later overturned by Brandenburg v. Ohio. The quote is actually a paraphrase of dictum, not the holding. and the original quote includes the word “falsely” - intent was always in the argument.

1 3

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 1d

Oh, no - the “fire in a theatre” argument has come out.

You do know that quote has been misinterpreted and isn’t even good law anymore, right?

1 2

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 2d

To be clear, I’m not laughing at ignorance. I’m laughing at the hubris required to demand something given freely by insulting those who gave it - with extremely weak and unimaginative insults, at that - and yet also put a full tech bio behind the name.

This is fucking ART, I tell you! 😂

1

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 2d

Now, wait just a minute, here - just where does this guy get off calling us SMELLY‽ 😡

I AM NEW TO GITHUB AND I HAVE ALOT TO SAY by danemadsen · Pull Request #1349 · torvalds/linux

I DONT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT THE FUCKING CODE! i just want to download this stupid fucking application and use it. https://github.com/torvalds/linux WHY IS THERE CODE??? MAKE A FUCKING .EXE FILE AND GI...

github.com

1 1

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 3d

Willie isn’t just awesome because of his music. He was already a legend before starting the TeaPot party and supporting Beto and Kamala, but then he did that duet with Orville Peck and became a legend among legends.

10

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 3d

We already had to let go of Bea and Betty. We’re just not ready to let go of Dolly yet.

1 20

Reposted by Ryan Egesdahl

National Security Counselors 🕵 @nationalsecuritylaw.org · 3d

Ngl it was kinda hilarious when someone suggested Dolly Parton might die last night and the entire Bluesky community said FUCK THAT and now she's doing better. People talk about the power of prayer but I think we tapped into something deeper and darker.

28 67 590

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 5d

“Desensitized” isn’t the word I would use, though that’s likely also the case. I think “fatigued” is the most apt descriptor for this one because even many of us who are aware of the enormity of these events are no longer moved by them.

1

Reposted by Ryan Egesdahl

KOJAMF🤘🖤🤘 @kojamf.bsky.social · 7d

Dr. Jane Goodall filmed an interview with Netflix in March 2025 that she understood would only be released after her death.

810 17K 38K

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 6d

Alternatively: just think what it must take to be considered abnormal by that person… 😬

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 6d

Two very different things seen by me today.

A man on a street corner waving a flag with “FUCK tRUmp” in red letters on a white background.

A dark blue Tesla sedan with a vanity license plate that reads “ADD OIL”.

1

Ryan Egesdahl @deriamis.net · 6d

It took me an embarrassingly large number of years to get what privilege is.

I genuinely believe that a lot (but definitely not all) of the opposition to social justice is due to poor terminology. Every time I explain privilege this way, the person I’m talking to gets it.

mady castigan✨ 🏳️‍⚧️ @madycast.com · 6d

these are questions hard for me to empathize with, as someone without the privilege of being able to go even a day without worrying about how racism impacts me or my friends. privilege is not visible gift, it's an invisible lack of a curse. Invisible to you, but unavoidable to us.

1 7 37

Reposted by Ryan Egesdahl

mady castigan✨ 🏳️‍⚧️ @madycast.com · 6d

these are questions hard for me to empathize with, as someone without the privilege of being able to go even a day without worrying about how racism impacts me or my friends. privilege is not visible gift, it's an invisible lack of a curse. Invisible to you, but unavoidable to us.

1 16 130