Slashdot Mirror
Judge: Freedom of the Press for Commercial Use Only
Kilroy writes "According to a Seattle judge freedom of the press only applies to paid journalists. As a result, he has indefinantly imprisoned a 70 year old former journalism professor for posting mean things on the web. I wonder how much something has to earn in order to make it legal to publish?"
Judge's Email: james.doerty@metrokc.govn derson.shtml
Reliable Link: http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/0212/news-a
Dear Sir:
I find your recent ruling and jailing of Mr. Paul Trummel to be misinformed and malicious to the extent that you cannot possibly be serving the interest of the public at large in your position. The freedom of speech is granted to all citizens, paid or not, in all venues, whether paper or electronic. I am using my right to freedom of speech right now to fairly criticize you and your actions.
I hope, for the sake of the Seattle Metropolitan area and the United States at large that your decision is overturned by a Superior Court. I believe it will be undoubtedly. The only injustice being done is the fact that you are capable of jailing an outspoken writer until your decisions are overturned. The legal system in the United States cannot stand such abuse sir.
Your position is precarious. Your decision is wrong. You have, by your stubborness to consider the larger view beyond your court room, contributed to the ever increasing rot in the United States Judicial System. I expect I would be jailed as well for this email if I were in your jurisdiction. Like the original founding fathers of this country that is a chance I take to fight oppression such as you represent.
A good day to you sir.
Registered Voter
United States Citizen
Why isn't this on the front page?
My reality check bounced.
There's one small problem with your argument, something the authors of the Constitution were well aware of and very clear about.
Who would decide what's the "legitimate press?" Why, the very government that's being challenged by the "illegitimate press" unprotected by a restricted First Amendment.
This is an intolerable conflict of interest. Some individuals may be able to avoid the temptation to suppress critical speech, but they are rare (look at the petty power exercised by most HS principals over their student newspapers) and the net result would be a huge chilling effect on every publisher.
That's why "Freedom of Press" and "Freedom of Speech" have historically covered *any* speech, oral or written, except for those items where there's specific harm caused by that speech. (E.g., slander and libel, respectively, or reasonable "time, manner and place" restrictions intended to balance First Amendment rights with other's right of peaceful enjoyment of their property and public spaces.) It doesn't matter if you have a publication in the millions, or an audience of one.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
See Judge Doerty's web site. He's an elected official with a four-year term, and is up for re-election in 2004.