Is Internet Freedom Legal?

 

Is Internet Freedom Legal?

The Internet has become a battleground where every user worldwide fights for the right to access, express, and distribute information without government censorship. People enjoy this freedom so much that sometimes they forget that some of the information they spread could cause damage. Social media platforms have allowed politicians and citizens to air their opinions at any time and place. With the growing political polarization, we see lots of hate speeches on politician’s posts. People insult politicians on different posts just because they have the platform to do so. The main concern is whether these opinions are legal. Is everyone free to make comments or post anything they feel like in the media? Can posts on these platforms lead to arrest or jail time for citizens or even the leaders? In my previous articles, I discussed the real damages caused by internet freedom, specifically concerning politics. Most scholars have previously examined how this unrestricted access and expression on the Internet impacts fundamental democratic rights like the ability to peacefully assemble, speak freely, and cast an informed ballot. In this article, I will focus on examining the legality of internet freedom, the status of internet freedom, and its effect on the relationship between civil society and political leaders.

Is Internet Freedom Legal?

According to the U.S. Department of State, the concept of Internet freedom inherently acknowledges the need to safeguard human rights and fundamental freedoms. The concept is developed from the freedom of the press, which is protected by the Freedom of the Press. In reference to the legal case of Reno v. ACLU, the Court ruled unanimously that the Internet should be considered a space where freedom of speech is protected, and it should get the same level of First Amendment protection as books, newspapers, and magazines. In essence, people should be able to exercise their rights to freedom of expression, association, religion or belief, and peaceful assembly in both online and offline realms.

Status of Freedom of the Internet in the U.S

According to new research by the U.S.-based organization Freedom House, global internet freedom deteriorated for the thirteenth year in 2023, especially due to increased disinformation issues. The decline in freedom of the Internet is not any different in America. There have been cases of arrests and jailing of activists over Facebook posts. For example, on 23^rd January 2017, a 35-year-old activist and musician, Robert Peralta, commented, “Wow, brother they wanna hit our general. It’s time to strike back. Let’s burn this motherfucker’s house down.”  Peralta commented on a well-known local activist's post about being "choked" and "slammed" by a sheriff's deputy at city hall.

Two months later, he got arrested, with a claim that his comment was threatening to kill law enforcement.

“On Facebook, you comment on so many things in minutes, I didn’t even mean it,” says Peralta during an interview. Even though he had no prior criminal records and turned himself in, he was sentenced/adjudicated in New York County.

Similarly, Chris Wahmhoff, a 38-year-old Michigan activist, faced legal consequences for participating in an oil pipeline protest, resulting in a felony conviction. Amid the Flint water crisis, he encountered further trouble by criticizing Governor Rick Snyder on Facebook. Wahmhoff's comment read: "So when y’all are ready to march in and take his ass across the street, I have my torch, I got warm socks. I’m waitin on y’all.”

The above cases imply that government officials constantly monitor internet use despite the existing laws that advocate for internet freedom as a human right. The Global Internet Freedom Bill, which was established during George Bush's presidency, advocates for the United States to condemn governments that impose limitations censor, prohibit, and obstruct access to internet information. The Bill also proposes the implementation of technologies designed to counter state-controlled Internet censorship and protect individuals who utilize the Internet. However, government officials continue to monitor internet use and prosecute individuals who utilize the Internet. Therefore, the declining freedom of the Internet in America is a barrier to movements intended to hold political leaders accountable for their actions.

The primary reason for monitoring internet use is for purposes of national security. According to a report by Dailymail, the government collects information from popular websites, including Facebook, Twitter, Hulu, WikiLeaks, and news and gossip sites, including the Huffington Post and Drudge Report, among other sites, to enhance situational awareness and develop operating plans. This means that anyone can be subject to government monitoring. It is up to individual users to be careful with the information they share or comment on social media.

Does the Government's Monitoring of the Internet Violate the Rights of Citizens?

Notably, the U.S. government has unlimited access to individuals' data, but constitutional provisions limit its monitoring activities. The First Amendment safeguards one’s right to free expression, whereas the Fourth Amendment protects American citizens from unreasonable government searches.   While these laws have not effectively prevented some government officials from monitoring, they pose challenges for government and law enforcement organizations whenever a related case develops.

In the context of social media surveillance, the Privacy Act is a crucial legislation.   The legislation restricts the acquisition, retention, and dissemination of personal data pertaining to American citizens and lawful residents, including information obtained from social media platforms. However, it is important to note that there is a specific exemption for data that falls within the scope of a legally authorized police enforcement activity.

For example, in Peralta's case, Alex Bastian, the spokesperson for the San Francisco district attorney's office responsible for prosecuting the case, highlighted that the deputy's family members reported Peralta's Facebook comment.   He further stated that despite the Court's respect for the First Amendment, people occasionally utter statements that violate another person's freedom to live without experiencing fear. As the freedom of the internet increases, some people take advantage and utter comments that violate other user's rights. Consequently, balancing between these considerations becomes a challenge during prosecution. As such, the question of whether monitoring citizen's posts on social media platforms violates people's rights is debatable. In some circumstances, the government should intervene, especially if the post or comment insinuates another person's life is in danger.

Sources

Henshall, W. (2023). Global Internet Freedom Declines, Aided by AI. Time. Retrieved from https://time.com/6319723/global-internet-freedom-decline-2023/