this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2025
121 points (99.2% liked)

United States | News & Politics

4093 readers
225 users here now

Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

No pics of text

Memes are now allowed, as long as they're US centric, general political memes please see !politicalmemes@lemmy.ca

Post news related to the United States.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ToastedRavioli@midwest.social 20 points 9 months ago

There is a difference between the two situations in that the government has a compelling interest in limiting speech that could harm people through the spread of misinformation. Like the classic “yelling fire in a crowded theatre” metric of what is not considered free speech.

In the case of Kimmel talking about Kirk, there is no compelling interest at play, as there is no possible direct harm to other people in saying literally anything about the guy, true or false.