> It's just that this... legal authority... isn't quite enforceable outside the UK jurisdiction.

That appears to be the widely held understanding in this particular case.

I'm not so sure. This isn't a strictly black letter law matter. It probably should be, and I'd prefer that it was, but I see political angles to this.

Right now, it is improbable that Trump's DOJ has any interest in doing Ofcom's bidding in the US for UK "online safety" violations, real or imagined. But a world where the US DOJ might does exist. We're the political vectors aligned differently; say, for example, Ofcom was pursuing 4chan for "supporting" ISIS in the UK, I think few people would be surprised learn that Trump's DOJ was eager to "investigate," and perhaps synthesize some indictable offenses, and perhaps even extradite.

Have we not seen, and are we not seeing now, ample examples of similar abuses of power?

So I see much of the rhetoric, and also this lawyer's flippancy, as naïve. Given the optimal set of office holders and sufficient moral panic over some matter, Ofcom et al. could very well have real leverage in the US.

▲

hunterpayne a day ago | parent [-]

Sure, that would require the Democrats win an election first. I wouldn't hold my breath on that one. Its not like Trump is the most inspiring candidate. When you lose 2 out of 3 to him, perhaps time to take a long look in the mirror. But no, the dems will probably run someone like AOC next time and lose badly. Even worse, once 2030 comes around there is a new census. This matters because enough people have moved from blue to red states that Republicans will no longer have to win any swing states to win both the House and POTUS. Unless something dramatic changes, like say the Dems run a southern governor instead of a coastal progressive, then we are looking at quite a while before we have to worry about that.

PS Don't yell at me about this, I'm just explaining the situation.

	▲	topspin a day ago \| parent [-]
		> Unless something dramatic changes Dramatic things happen with regularity. Wars, viruses, economic calamities... there is no predicting any of it. For all you or I know 4 years from now the (D)s will own everything. Maybe then Ofcom gets a hearing. Maybe Ofcom doesn't exist any longer. This misses the point. The point is that the hubris exhibited here, in this forum, and also by this lawyer, behaving as though there is some perpetual immunity in effect, is naïve. It is entirely plausible that some foreign regulator with intentions that happen to align well with the prerogatives of prevailing office holders right now or at any point in the future could have have powerful leverage in the US.