infosecnick.bsky.social @infosecnick.bsky.social · 30/06/2026Fair enough. The original conversation was based on a wacky hypothetical. I will say it's always seemed insane to me that the federal govt can regulate speech on certain EM frequencies that are also dictated by the govt, and that didn't require a constitutional amendment. 100
Steven Jenkins @jsjuni.bsky.social · 30/06/2026The government's ability to regulate speech even under those circumstances is extremely circumscribed. It cannot, for example, require a license holder to "tell the truth" or "give equal time", among other popular misconceptions. 100
infosecnick.bsky.social @infosecnick.bsky.social · 30/06/2026Still seems like you'd need a constitutional amendment for the government to regulate speech that doesn't have a direct harm (profanity) even if narrow. I guess we're all just kind of okay with it because broadcasting EM doesn't apply to most people's daily lives and state laws would be a mess 000