■ Separately, a TikTok employee is suing the administration, contending the president’s order unlawfully jeopardizes his family’s livelihood.
■ A Yale student suggests that, instead of attempting to force TikTok’s sale to a U.S. company, the administration should “use TikTok as a guinea pig to test a global data governance framework.”
Facebook’s fears. The Verge’s Casey Newton suggests “Facebook would much rather live in a world where it has to compete with TikTok than one where a social network can be banned whenever it displeases the ruling party of one country or another.”
■ Users of the Chinese-owned WeChat app are suing the Trump administration over the president’s confusing order banning “any transaction” with the app.
■ A human resources expert answers the question “Can comments on Facebook get me fired?”
Understanding ‘under God.’ The Associated Press’ fact-check finds Trump distorted what happened to those words in the Pledge of Allegiance at the Democratic National Convention.
■ But, as Fox News notes, that didn’t keep Republicans in the days following from leaning into those two words.
■ The National Constitution Center reviews the history of legal challenges to the pledge.
‘I learned that the Democrat Party plans to abolish the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, Jesus, and the suburbs.’ Esquire’s Charlie Pierce sarcastically recaps Monday’s opening session of the Republican National Convention.
■ A New York Times roundup notes the founder of the conservative group Turning Point USA told the convention the nation’s creation was “centered around central biblical ideals,” even though the First Amendment expressly prohibits a national religion.
■ Libertarian Reason magazine editor-at-large Matt Welch fact-checks Night One: “No, Trump has not fiercely defended the First Amendment.”
■ Journalism critic Jack Shafer, reviewing a new book, The Presidents vs. the Press: The Endless Battle Between the White House and the Media, concludes Trump “might not even rank in the top five” of the greatest presidential enemies of the First Amendment.
‘The First Amendment protects some pretty hideous speech.’ TechDirt says a federal appeals court ruling out of Ohio provides a reminder of that protection even for statements uttered by public servants.
■ The same court has ruled the First Amendment doesn’t trump an Ohio law forbidding health practitioners from soliciting accident victims.
‘It’s the opposite of what must be taught.’ Texas’ governor wants a teacher fired for giving students an assignment that included a political cartoon comparing police officers to slave owners and Ku Klux Klan members.
■ An employment lawyer on workers’ rights to wear Black Lives Matter garb on the job: “With very few exceptions, there are no free speech rights in the private workplace.”
■ Veteran political reporter Bob Lewis: Free speech is “not free of consequence. Never has been. Never will be.”
Anti-anti-riot ruling. A federal appeals court has limited the reach of a 1968 anti-riot law the Trump administration used to charge white supremacists who punched and kicked counter-demonstrators during the 2017 “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville.
■ But, Politico reports, the ruling could have been worse for the Justice Department.
■ Wonkette: “Tennessee Republicans: Protesters Can Either Have Free Speech Or Voting Rights, Not Both.”
‘This is a moment in journalism to experiment. The status quo is buckling.’ Columbia Journalism Review’s publisher has signed on to the advisory council for a new news cooperative with an unusual business model.■ Nieman Lab: “Some Countries are Using the Pandemic as an Excuse to Crack Down on Journalism.”
■ The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission says that, with the exception of obscene, indecent, or profane programming, U.S. broadcasters have “discretion to determine what content to air … even if that programming could be objectionable to some viewers.”