Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Enrique Bedlam

@enriquebedlam.bsky.social

800 followers 320 following 5.8K posts

Mexican-Cuban weirdo. Immigration paralegal. IANAL. Florida Gnomes, take my bones, to a place, they don't belong! he/him. Caffeine addict.

Posts Media Videos Starter Packs

Pinned

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · Jul 18

Y'all the defendant/s will try a motion to dismiss in that defamation before it ever gets to discovery where they will argue lack of Actual Malice/causation/that the statement was an opinion and they will likely win.

2 1 12

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 3h

What do you think this article has to do with the difficulty of proving Falsity for a claim of general dishonesty?

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 3h

It's not, though states with Anti-Slapp laws have protection against that.

Opening speech is the best protection against the rich, not closing it.

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 3h

Jody, most of the examples here refer to cases where the context was a specific lie. That's very different then calling someone a liar in general.

1 4

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 5h

Well yeah, but I also don't think other administrations would claim Tylenol and circumcisions causes autism so.... The argument seems specific to our reality.

1 2

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 5h

Sovereign Immunity and the Westfall Act say no, the office cannot be sued. It also says the individual won't be sued either.

(And even further if a private individual sues, Tylenol would still lose due to lack of evidence of Actual Malice and could even lose on falsity)

1 3

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 5h

Good news bad news. The good news is we won't have to pay, the bad news is that it's because sovereign immunity kills the suit.

1 1

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 5h

They could. How's your law gonna deal with "We spoke to a source close to the Whitehouse who claimed to see Biden handing stacks of money to the CEO of Hamas"

Does that get prosecuted? Or does the law force the revelation of the source?

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 12h

I am implying that the name of the author was intentionally inaccurately reported. A lie. As was the fact that there was more than one author.

So how do you ban lying without banning that?

1 3

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 13h

Did a man called Publius write the argument? If not, then the author lied to the public. Now if you want to start figuring out what kind of lies MATTER, well now you are stepping further back into the motte.

As if banning lying in the press won't lead to waters so muddy you can walk on them.

1 2

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 13h

Hi enthusiast, I am sure you have already figured this out with your lawyer but....who exactly was that post calling you a genocide apologist of and concerning?

1 1

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 13h

Correct. I mean lets go basic Hollywood history.
Did a man named Publius write in defense of the US constitution in our national press when it was being ratified? Do you think Publius think's it is ok to lie to the public in the press?

1 2

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 13h

I mean in court? Yeah. If you aren't an officer of the court you are not help to that standard. And even then, it very much doesn't look like what you want it to.

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 13h

Yeah. Because the alternative is it takes the express train to hell.

1 3

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 15h

I imagine it's aspirational rather then descriptive.

1 1

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 15h

Ok. So who decides who gets to be news? If you wanna be on the local 8pm you need to get a bar accreditation? Masters degree? How do we gatekeep journalism to create the same rules as an officer of the court?

1 1

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 15h

If you wish to defend speech, you need to defend lying. It's that simple.

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 15h

Yes. Because here is the fun thing about regulating lies....if you asked King George if the complaints against him were true or lies what do you think he would say?

1 5

Enrique Bedlam @enriquebedlam.bsky.social · 1d

No. It was blocked because he wanted to put his name on the cruelty in the bill. And he did. The messaging failure was buying in to the Border Problems narrative.