| ▲ | ethin 5 hours ago | |
What are you proposing then? The government is not allowed to compel speech for good reason. | ||
| ▲ | Y-bar 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
That’s not a Carte Blanche that forbids the government from everything. The government can compel speech from food and other producers to print content and nutritional labels on their products. The government can compel speech on a yearly basis when we file taxes. The can compel speech such as guidance maps and websites to be accessible to the blind (ADA). They can compel vehicle owners to provide insurance and ownership information, which is a kind of speech. | ||
| ▲ | hgoel 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
Welp, better get rid of all nutritional facts, allergy warnings, medical side effect notices and all the other signage mandated by government for your safety. | ||
| ▲ | ppseafield 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
This is not just free speech, it's commerce, and the government has the ability to regulate commerce. Warranties and lemon laws are not regulating speech - they're regulating sales and the legal requirements for those sales. Providing a method for playing a game a customer purchased after the company decides to abandon it is putting a legal requirement on the sale of goods. | ||