Connect with us

Published

on

For good reason, much attention was devoted to the Supreme Court’s oral arguments on Monday, over government pressure on social media companies to suppress speech that officialdom doesn’t like. The same day, though, justices heard arguments in another important case involving free speech principles violated when New York officials leaned on financial institutions to deny services to the National Rifle Association. Importantly, both cases involved “jawboning,” the use by government of threats to improperly coerce compliance.

The Rattler is a weekly newsletter from J.D. Tuccille. If you care about government overreach and tangible threats to everyday liberty, this is for you. Email(Required) PhoneThis field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged. Submit

Δ When Communication Becomes Coercion

As Reason’s Jacob Sullum ably summarizes, arguments in Murthy v. Missouri involve “dueling interpretations of the Biden administration’s interactions with social media platforms regarding content it viewed as dangerous to public health, democracy, or national security,” with plaintiffs arguing that “those private contacts, combined with public statements condemning the platforms’ failure to suppress ‘misinformation,’ amounted to government-directed censorship.”

At stake is the point at which efforts to persuade private companies they ought not offer platforms to certain speakers morph into “nice business you got there; it’d be a shame if something happened to it.” Did officials cross the line when they badgered tech firms to muzzle voices skeptical of lockdowns, COVID vaccinations, and election integrity? If you’ve followed the Twitter and Facebook Files, you know there’s significant evidence they did, though it remains to be seen if Supreme Court justices agree.

Remarkably, the evidence of improper strong-arming appears even clearer in National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo. In that case, the NRA, joined by the ACLU, alleges that Maria Vullo, former Superintendent of the New York State Department of Financial Services, abused the power of her position to punish the gun rights organization for its political positions.

“Vullo met with executives at Lloyd’s of London to discuss her views on gun control and to tell them she believed the company’s underwriting of NRA-endorsed insurance policies raised regulatory issues,” according to Abby Smith of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE). “She told them Lloyd’s could ‘avoid liability’but only if the company told its syndicates to stop underwriting their insurance policies, and joined her agency’s ‘campaign against gun groups.'”

There was nothing subtle about the arm-twisting. In 2018 I wrote about guidance letters New York regulators sent to banks and insurance companies, at the behest of then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo, cautioning “regulated institutions to review any relationships they have with the NRA or similar gun promotion organizations, and to take prompt actions to managing these risks and promote public health and safety.” Given that insurance companies and banks are tightly regulated and operate largely at the pleasure of state officials, this would logically be interpreted as a threat. Subsequently, banks and insurance companies alike cut ties with the NRA.

“New York, if these facts are true, tried to circumvent the First Amendment’s ban on censorship by relying on this informal pressure campaign,” noted FIRE’s Smith. “But informal censorship violates the First Amendment, too.” Extra-Legal Threats Violate Individual Rights Protections, Say the Courts

Such informal censorship is known as “jawboning” since, as the Cato Institute’s Will Duffield wrote in 2022, it involves “bullying, threatening, and cajoling” in the place of formal legal action.

“Jawboning occurs when a government official threatens to use his or her powerbe it the power to prosecute, regulate, or legislateto compel someone to take actions that the state official cannot,” observed Duffield. “Jawboning is dangerous because it allows government officials to assume powers not granted to them by law.”

Despite formal protections for individual liberties, such as the First Amendment, the vast regulatory power wielded by government agencies in the United States is easily weaponized against people who don’t do the government’s bidding. Such abuses aren’t hypothetical but are a matter of public record already addressed by the courts.

“People do not lightly disregard public officers’ thinly veiled threats to institute criminal proceedings against them if they do not come around,” the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in Bantam Books v. Sullivan (1963). That case involved Rhode Island officials hassling booksellers to refrain from stocking allegedly obscene publications. The implied threats and constant nagging of booksellers by state officials “was in fact a scheme of state censorship effectuated by extra-legal sanctions,” ruled the court.

Does “a scheme of state censorship effectuated by extra-legal sanctions” better describe the situation in the Murthy case or in the NRA case? Well, Monday was a twofer day, so why not both? A Strong Case Against New York’s Jawboning

In truth, New York regulators’ threats to insurance companies and banks that do business with the NRA and other gun groups were so overt that even commenters hostile to the NRA and self-defense rights concede that state officials went way over the line.

“Every now and then, the Supreme Court takes up a case involving a public official who acted so foolishly…that you wish the justices could each take turns smacking them upside the head,” Vox’s Ian Millhiser, no fan of the NRA, conceded last November. “National Rifle Association v. Vullo, which the Court announced that it would hear last Friday, is such a case.”

And so far, while it’s uncertain which way the justices will jump in Murthy, the court seems inclined to agree that it’s impermissible for government officials to use regulatory threats to coerce financial firms into cutting ties with disfavored political organizations.

“The Supreme Court on Monday appeared sympathetic to the National Rifle Association’s claim that a New York official violated the group’s right to freedom of speech when she urged banks and insurance companies that worked with the NRA to cut ties with the group,” SCOTUSblog’s Amy Howe concluded. ACLU Legal Director David Cole “closed by telling the justices that ‘the notion that this is business as usual, for a government official to speak with a private party and say we’ll go easy on you if you aid my campaign to weaken the NRA. That is not business as usual. That is not ordinary plea negotiation.’ Although it was not entirely clear, a majority of the justices seemed to agree with him.”

With government reaching ever further into American life, it’s time the court reminds officials, once again, that their intrusive powers aren’t supposed to be used to bypass protections for individual rights.

Continue Reading

UK

Royal Navy chief gives stark warning: Fund defence or risk losing Atlantic to Russia

Published

on

By

Royal Navy chief gives stark warning: Fund defence or risk losing Atlantic to Russia

The head of the Royal Navy has warned the government to “step up” and fund defence or risk losing the UK’s superiority in the Atlantic to Russia.

Should that happen, General Sir Gwyn Jenkins said it would be the first time since the end of the Second World War that Britain’s warships and submarines were not the dominant force in their most vital sea lanes alongside their allies.

“We are holding on, but not by much,” he told a conference in London on Monday.

“There is no room for complacency. Our would-be opponents are investing billions. We have to step up, or we will lose that advantage.”

As a senior, serving military officer speaking publicly, he did not make any direct criticism of the speed of plans by Sir Keir Starmer’s government to increase defence spending.

But Sky News has reported that he and his fellow chiefs held a “very difficult meeting” last month over how to fund plans to rebuild the armed forces amid fears of further cuts.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Budget: what about defence spending?

Defence sources said there was growing concern at the very top of the armed forces about a gap between the promises being made by the prime minister to fix the UK’s hollowed-out defences and the reality of the size of the defence budget, which is currently not seen as growing fast enough.

That means either billions of additional pounds must be found more quickly, or ambitions to modernise and transform the armed forces might need to be curbed, despite warnings of mounting threats from Russia and China, and pressure from Donald Trump on allies to spend more on their own defences.

A Sky News and Tortoise podcast series called The Wargame tracks the hollowing out of the UK’s military since the end of the Cold War and the risk that has created.

👉Search for The Wargame on your podcast app👈

General Jenkins, the first Royal Marine to serve as First Sea Lord, used a speech at the Sea Power Conference to say that Russia is still investing billions in its naval capabilities – in particular the Northern Fleet that operates in the Atlantic – even as it wages war against Ukraine.

There has been a 30% increase in Russian incursions in the North Atlantic in the past two years, he said.

That included the Yantar spy ship, which last month was spotted off the coast of Scotland and even shone a laser at the pilots of a Royal Air Force reconnaissance plane that was tracking the vessel.

The Russian spy ship Yantar. Pic: MOD/PA
Image:
The Russian spy ship Yantar. Pic: MOD/PA

Yet General Jenkins said what Russia is doing beneath the surface of the waves, where the UK and its allies store vital communications cables as well as critical oil and gas pipelines, was even more concerning.

“I can also tell you today that the advantage that we have enjoyed in the Atlantic since the end of the Second World War is at risk,” he said.

Read more:
UK unveils undersea tech
Does Britain’s threat to Russia ring hollow?

HMS Iron Duke shadowing the Russian Frigate Neustrashimy through UK waters in September. Pic: PA
Image:
HMS Iron Duke shadowing the Russian Frigate Neustrashimy through UK waters in September. Pic: PA

Navy facing huge challenges

It is a particularly tough time for the navy, which has more ships and submarines alongside and unable to operate than at sea or at least ready to sail.

The service is also suffering from a shortage of sailors and in particular submariners, which again is impacting the availability of the fleet.

The crisis follows decades of funding cuts since the end of the Cold War, compounded by a litany of botched procurement programmes that has all too often seen vessels coming into service years late, at an inflated price and in too few numbers.

Vision of ‘hybrid navy’

Despite the sombre tone, the First Sea Lord set out how he wants to transform his service and make it ready to fight a war – though not until 2029, a timeline that could be too slow if some predictions about the threat posed by Russia to NATO are correct.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

New UK military technology unveiled

His vision – working with industry and other allies – is about developing a blend of manned ships and submarines as well as unmanned ones – a “hybrid navy”.

He is also stripping back what he called the navy’s own bureaucracies to enable the service to move much faster – crucially at the pace of the threat and the pace of rapid and growing technological change.

“We will face headwinds, we will face rough seas, but together, we can solve these problems if we have the appetite, if we have the determination, and if we have the mindset.”

Continue Reading

UK

Teen Afghan asylum seekers locked up for raping girl

Published

on

By

Teen Afghan asylum seekers locked up for raping girl

Two teenage asylum seekers from Afghanistan face possible deportation after being detained for abducting and raping a 15-year-old girl.

Jan Jahanzeb and Israr Niazal, both 17, led the “highly-distressed” victim away from friends near Leamington town centre to a secluded “den-type” area in parkland, where they pushed her to the ground and attacked her.

Sentencing the pair at Warwick Crown Court on Monday, Judge Sylvia de Bertodano said they ignored the victim’s “vigorous protests” and told them what they did “changed her life forever”.

“No child should have to suffer the ordeal that she suffered. It’s clear from the footage we have seen that no one can seriously entertain the thought that you believed she was consenting,” she said.

“You both knew perfectly well that what you were doing was criminal and wrong,” the judge added.

‘Highly distressing’

After lifting reporting restrictions protecting the identities of the defendants, the judge told them they had “betrayed” those who come to Britain seeking sanctuary and who observed the law.

Both defendants were unaccompanied child asylum seekers who arrived in the UK last year, prosecutor Shawn Williams said.

The incident happened in May of this year.

“Highly distressing” phone video found by police showed the victim screamed for help, but Jahanzeb placed his hand over her mouth.

CCTV footage showed that after being led away against her will, the terrified victim was “moved to a bushy den-type area – a really secluded location” before, according to her, she was “pushed to her knees before being raped”.

“The prosecution case is that it was probably Jahanzeb that did that, but what is certain is that Israr Niazal was present and participating,” Mr Williams said.

The victim had made “explicit verbal protests” during what Mr Williams described as an abduction.

What are their sentences?

Jahanzeb, who has already been served with deportation notification papers, was given 10 years, eight months’ youth detention.

Niazal, who may also be deported, was sentenced to nine years and 10 months.

They will start their sentences in a young offenders’ institution and move to prison at a later date, police said.

Both pleaded guilty to rape at an earlier hearing.

Read more from Sky News:
Storm brings ‘danger to life’
Rapper admits dangerous driving
My ‘traumatic’ maternity experience

Detective Chief Inspector Richard Hobbs said the offenders “went out of their way to befriend the victim with the intention of raping her”.

“The length of their sentence reflects the severity of their crime and the need to protect the public from them,” he added.

After sentence was passed, Judge de Bertodano said the victim had been “beyond brave” in attending court at a previous stage, when the defendants had intended to plead not guilty.

They were both ordered to register as sex offenders.

Continue Reading

UK

‘Striking’ new artwork for UK trains revealed – as MPs debate rail nationalisation

Published

on

By

'Striking' new artwork for UK trains revealed - as MPs debate rail nationalisation

A “striking” new design for UK trains has been revealed by the transport secretary – but you may well think it looks familiar.

Train services already in public ownership will begin to adopt a Union flag-inspired design from this spring, Heidi Alexander has confirmed.

It’s part of the government’s efforts to nationalise most passenger rail services in the UK and run them under the new Great British Railways (GBR) brand – with its logo to be unveiled later today.

Ms Alexander will be speaking more about GBR – which is due to be formally established in 2027 – on Mornings With Ridge And Frost from around 7.10am.

The new Great British Railways logo has drawn on the original logo of British Rail from 1965.
Pic: Dovetail Games.
Image:
The new Great British Railways logo has drawn on the original logo of British Rail from 1965.
Pic: Dovetail Games.

Haven’t I seen this somewhere before?

The branding features the familiar double arrow symbol used by British Rail when the country’s trains were last state-owned.

A spokesperson for the Department for Transport (DfT) said the “iconic” symbol has been incorporated into the new GBR logo to reflect “Britain’s proud railway heritage”.

Ms Alexander has insisted it “isn’t just a paint job”, saying: “It represents a new railway, casting off the frustrations of the past and focused entirely on delivering a proper public service for passengers.”

Special one-day public exhibition launched

People in the capital will be able to see the new train livery for themselves today, with a special one-day exhibit being held at London Bridge station, where a GBR-branded Hornby model train will be on display.

The government has also partnered with a gaming company to create mock-ups of the new design, and those at the station will be able to see a digital demonstration of the new artwork in Train Sim World 6.

The new designs will also be beamed on to digital display boards over the coming days at Manchester Piccadilly, Birmingham New Street, Glasgow Central, and Leeds City.

People in the capital will be able to see a mock-up of a train in the new livery in a Train Sim World 6 game.
Pic: Dovetail Games.
Image:
People in the capital will be able to see a mock-up of a train in the new livery in a Train Sim World 6 game.
Pic: Dovetail Games.

It comes as MPs prepare to debate the government’s Railways Bill in the Commons.

The government has taken control of seven major operators so far, but has pledged to return all passenger services to public ownership as contracts with existing operators expire or are broken through a failure to deliver.

Read more:
What is Labour’s rail nationalisation plan?

Rail fares frozen for first time in 30 years

What will nationalisation actually involve?

The government has said its Railways Bill will bring 17 different organisations together and will also lead to greater accountability, better services and an easier way to buy tickets.

Among the measures is the creation of a GBR app, where passengers will be able to check train times and buy tickets without booking fees, while those with disabilities will be able to also request assistance.

A new 'one-stop shop' app will be launched as part of the scheme.
Pic: Department for Transport
Image:
A new ‘one-stop shop’ app will be launched as part of the scheme.
Pic: Department for Transport

The draft law would also beef up accountability by creating a strengthened Passenger Watchdog, while GBR would operate both services and maintain the railways themselves.

Ministers have pointed to improvements to existing services since they have been nationalised, such as South Western Railway boosting capacity by almost 10% by quadrupling its number of Arterio trains in service.

A new East Coast Main Line timetable will also come into effect this month, which the government says will lead to 10,000 extra LNER services every year, or roughly 60,000 extra seats a week.

Continue Reading

Trending