Author: Publisher: DIANE Publishing
ISBN: 1457816253
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 41
Book Description
Advice Concerning Possible Modifications to the U.S. Generalized System of Preferences, 2009 Review of a Competitive Need Limit Waiver, Inv. 332-512
Author: Publisher: DIANE Publishing
ISBN: 1457816253
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 41
Book Description
The Year in Trade
Author: Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Foreign trade regulation
Languages : en
Pages : 162
Book Description
Overview and Compilation of U.S. Trade Statutes
Author: United StatesPublisher:
ISBN:
Category : Customs administration
Languages : en
Pages : 1186
Book Description
Higher Education Opportunity Act
Author: United StatesPublisher:
ISBN:
Category : Education, Higher
Languages : en
Pages : 432
Book Description
Administrative Careers with America (ACWA)
Author: ArcoPublisher: Arco
ISBN: 9780768908671
Category : Study Aids
Languages : en
Pages : 240
Book Description
The Administrative Careers With America (ACWA) exam is the test required for thousands of entry-level administrative, professional, and technical positions with the federal government. This guide offers the only preparation available, providing everything test-takers need to launch rewarding government careers.
An Outline of Law and Procedure in Representation Cases
Author: United States. National Labor Relations Board. Office of the General CounselPublisher:
ISBN:
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 500
Book Description
International Convergence of Capital Measurement and Capital Standards
Author: Publisher: Lulu.com
ISBN: 9291316695
Category : Bank capital
Languages : en
Pages : 294
Book Description
Intelligence Community Legal Reference Book
Author: Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Electronic surveillance
Languages : en
Pages : 944
Book Description
Free Speech and the Regulation of Social Media Content
Author: Valerie C. BrannonPublisher: Independently Published
ISBN: 9781092635158
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 50
Book Description
As the Supreme Court has recognized, social media sites like Facebook and Twitter have become important venues for users to exercise free speech rights protected under the First Amendment. Commentators and legislators, however, have questioned whether these social media platforms are living up to their reputation as digital public forums. Some have expressed concern that these sites are not doing enough to counter violent or false speech. At the same time, many argue that the platforms are unfairly banning and restricting access to potentially valuable speech. Currently, federal law does not offer much recourse for social media users who seek to challenge a social media provider's decision about whether and how to present a user's content. Lawsuits predicated on these sites' decisions to host or remove content have been largely unsuccessful, facing at least two significant barriers under existing federal law. First, while individuals have sometimes alleged that these companies violated their free speech rights by discriminating against users' content, courts have held that the First Amendment, which provides protection against state action, is not implicated by the actions of these private companies. Second, courts have concluded that many non-constitutional claims are barred by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. ยง 230, which provides immunity to providers of interactive computer services, including social media providers, both for certain decisions to host content created by others and for actions taken "voluntarily" and "in good faith" to restrict access to "objectionable" material. Some have argued that Congress should step in to regulate social media sites. Government action regulating internet content would constitute state action that may implicate the First Amendment. In particular, social media providers may argue that government regulations impermissibly infringe on the providers' own constitutional free speech rights. Legal commentators have argued that when social media platforms decide whether and how to post users' content, these publication decisions are themselves protected under the First Amendment. There are few court decisions evaluating whether a social media site, by virtue of publishing, organizing, or even editing protected speech, is itself exercising free speech rights. Consequently, commentators have largely analyzed the question of whether the First Amendment protects a social media site's publication decisions by analogy to other types of First Amendment cases. There are at least three possible frameworks for analyzing governmental restrictions on social media sites' ability to moderate user content. Which of these three frameworks applies will depend largely on the particular action being regulated. Under existing law, social media platforms may be more likely to receive First Amendment protection when they exercise more editorial discretion in presenting user-generated content, rather than if they neutrally transmit all such content. In addition, certain types of speech receive less protection under the First Amendment. Courts may be more likely to uphold regulations targeting certain disfavored categories of speech such as obscenity or speech inciting violence. Finally, if a law targets a social media site's conduct rather than speech, it may not trigger the protections of the First Amendment at all.
Guidance Manual for Compliance with the Filtration and Disinfection Requirements for Public Water Systems Using Surface Water Sources
Author: David J. HiltebrandPublisher:
ISBN:
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 672
Book Description
This manual suggests design operating and performance criteria for specific surface water quality conditions to provide the optimum protection from microbiological contaminants.