Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsU.S. appeals court finds conflict-minerals rule violates free speech
U.S. appeals court finds conflict-minerals rule violates free speech
By Sarah N. Lynch and Lawrence Hurley
(Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Monday struck down parts of a regulation that forces public companies to disclose if their products contain "conflict minerals" from a war-torn part of Africa, saying it violates free speech rights.
The ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit marks a partial victory for the three business groups that had filed the original lawsuit, which claimed that the regulation violated companies' free speech rights under the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment by in essence forcing them to condemn their own products.
The appeals court upheld other parts of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission rule, which requires publicly traded manufacturers to disclose to investors whether any tantalum, tin, gold or tungsten used in their products may have originated from the conflict-ridden Democratic Republic of Congo.
The case is one of several in recent years in which industry groups have, with mixed success, made free speech objections to government regulations. Others include challenges to meat labeling requirements and a rule that required extractive industries to disclose payments to foreign governments.
- more -
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/14/us-court-sec-conflictminerals-idUSBREA3D13U20140414
By Sarah N. Lynch and Lawrence Hurley
(Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Monday struck down parts of a regulation that forces public companies to disclose if their products contain "conflict minerals" from a war-torn part of Africa, saying it violates free speech rights.
The ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit marks a partial victory for the three business groups that had filed the original lawsuit, which claimed that the regulation violated companies' free speech rights under the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment by in essence forcing them to condemn their own products.
The appeals court upheld other parts of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission rule, which requires publicly traded manufacturers to disclose to investors whether any tantalum, tin, gold or tungsten used in their products may have originated from the conflict-ridden Democratic Republic of Congo.
The case is one of several in recent years in which industry groups have, with mixed success, made free speech objections to government regulations. Others include challenges to meat labeling requirements and a rule that required extractive industries to disclose payments to foreign governments.
- more -
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/14/us-court-sec-conflictminerals-idUSBREA3D13U20140414
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
6 replies, 837 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (5)
ReplyReply to this post
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
U.S. appeals court finds conflict-minerals rule violates free speech (Original Post)
ProSense
Apr 2014
OP
ProSense
(116,464 posts)1. Interesting concept:
...the regulation violated companies' free speech rights under the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment by in essence forcing them to condemn their own products.
The case is one of several in recent years in which industry groups have, with mixed success, made free speech objections to government regulations.
Regulations violate free speech. Where have I heard that before?
Orrex
(63,215 posts)2. Speed limits violate my free speech, then.
I have the constitutionally-guaranteed freedom to express myself at 120mph on the highway.
missing. From the OP
The appeals court upheld other parts of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission rule, which requires publicly traded manufacturers to disclose to investors whether any tantalum, tin, gold or tungsten used in their products may have originated from the conflict-ridden Democratic Republic of Congo.
If this isn't a violation, why is the other part considered one?
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)5. Yep, giving corporations freedom of speech is a huge loophole
to get around laws and regulations they don't like.
hatrack
(59,587 posts)6. Don't worry - a few more free trade agreements, no more need for "loopholes"
Simple, isn't it?
Nictuku
(3,614 posts)4. Are We There Yet? (Facisim) - The Computer Says Yes