Items

• 
  2022-04-21

  Does Free Speech Protect COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation?

  This is a story from Standford Medicine's Scope Blog by Sharon Beckstrand. This is an opinion piece on free speech and misinformation as it relates to COVID-19. Beckstrand goes over some of the reasoning some might resist getting vaccinated, such as political beliefs. Some of these beliefs can come from well-intentioned individuals thinking they are spreading good information, or from intentionally misleading sources. Both of these examples are classified under misinformation. The author of this asks: how can the spread of misinformation be stopped without quashing free speech? To get an idea on how the United States approaches this with the First Amendment is though Supreme Court cases. The Supreme Court has upheld that false statements are still protected under free speech. A 2012 case of United States vs. Alvarez struck down a law that made it a criminal offense to lie about receiving military medals, as a false statement is still protected under the First Amendment. Other types of speech are not protected, such as: lying in court, making false statements to the government, impersonating a government official, and defaming someone. Beckstrand lays out some of the dangers that can come from the government trying to police false claims. One thing she asks people to consider is that a scientific statement claimed as false today could be considered verifiable at a different time, especially if it is something that has not been studied yet. Additionally, many do not trust the government to not abuse power when deciding what is misinformation. The article ends by saying that if something becomes politicized, they are more likely to view messages from groups they don't identify with as suspicious, regardless of how much evidence there is to back it up. At the end, Beckstrand closes with saying that if we cannot make sound decisions on how we interact with information, we can't make sound decisions about health.
• 
  2020-08-21

  I Stood Up for Indigenous Rights at Mount Rushmore. Now I'm Facing 17 Years

  On July 4th 2020, United States President Donald Trump held a controversial political rally at Mount Rushmore, South Dakota. The rally was controversial for a number of reasons, the first being that during the height of the covid-19 pandemic – social distancing and mask-wearing policies were not enforced during the rally. The political rally was also held on sacred Indigenous land and what was once part of the Lakota Sioux territory. To many Indigenous and non-Indigenous people alike, this action felt like a slap in the face to Indigenous communicates who are facing disproportionate affects from the covid-19 pandemic. This opinion piece is written by Oglala Lakota citizen, and president and CEO of the NDN Collective, Nick Tilsen who is facing felony charges and up-to-17 years in prison for exercising his first amendment right to protest on the day of the rally.
• 2020-06-01

  Right to Assemble during Covid-19

  This photo was taken during a march against police brutality, in which everyone had to wear masks and social distance in "pods" while marching